Why is Python popular, while Lisp and Scheme aren't?

[Richard Dillingham]

The C/C++ "standard" I actually assumed to be standard from the following
facts:
    1) MSVC++ autogenerates code that has {}s placed in the manner which I
called "standard"
    2) Almost all of the open-source C/C++ projects I have looked at have
{}s placed in the manner which I called "standard"
    3) Source code included with MSVC++ 6 has {}s placed in the manner which
I called "standard", and the following is quoted from \MFC\SRC\AFXABORT.CPP
(This file is included with MSVC++ 6):
        // This is a part of the Microsoft Foundation Classes C++ library.
        // Copyright (C) 1992-1998 Microsoft Corporation
        // All rights reserved.
        //
        // This source code is only intended as a supplement to the
        // Microsoft Foundation Classes Reference and related
        // electronic documentation provided with the library.
        // See these sources for detailed information regarding the
        // Microsoft Foundation Classes product.

        #include "stdafx.h"

        #ifdef AFX_AUX_SEG
        #pragma code_seg(AFX_AUX_SEG)
        #endif

        // Note: in separate module so if can be replaced if needed

        void AFXAPI AfxAbort()
        {
            TRACE0("AfxAbort called.\n");

            AfxWinTerm();
            abort();
        }


////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/

That was the first file (alphabetically) in that folder (to make it easy for
the rest of you to find), and also quite short. I looked at several random
files in that folder,
all of which had {}s placed in the same manner (on the next line after the
start of a function).

Perhaps it is only a Microsoft standard, but that makes it a fairly
pervasive standard, at least for the Windows world.