From: "David Ascher" <DavidA@ActiveState.com>
On the topic of macros et al:
I think that delivering minimal python will be quite hard. If the mandate is to create a new implementation of Python, then I think that the syntax of current Python should be seen as a "minimal" requirement from a syntactic POV. New syntactic elements can clearly be defined as well, although naturally care should be taken to ensure that existing code still works. (so making 'spam' a reserved word probably wouldn't work).
On the other hand, I'm going to lose interest in this project pretty fast if it turns into an _unsubstantiated_ argument about language design. If a new language construct is proposed as a fairly direct and well-supported way to get the implementation done better, faster, cheaper, then by all means.
maybe I was not completely clear but that was my point too. I believe that an open parser architecture can do the trick (i.e. supporting necessary additional constructs) without the struggle of a debate on syntax/semantics of macros in python. I sense that toying with new language features at large risks to be rather non-constructive.