Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Alex Martelli]

Mark Wilson wrote:
   ...
> 3. Python's syntax is one of the worst features of the language and

Ha.

> should not be adopted by Lisp and Scheme.

Obviously not, as it would not fit in with all the rest of their features.

> Joe Marshall's analysis is establishes this. There have been no

"is establishes"?  Is that a new variant on "all your bases are belong
to us"?

> responses to Joe Marshall's analysis that successfully refute his
> analysis.

I guess I haven't been posting ENOUGH on this thread -- I don't
recall the "is establishes" analysis in question, just the usual FUD
about "copy and paste errors" and other variants on whitespace-
eating nanoviruses -- I tore a few to shreds, but it was almost
incidental to all the rest of the volume.

> 4. The productivity of the prolific posters must have precipitously
> phaded.

True in my case -- the amount of FUD and insults posted and
demanding response being so high -- as seen above, even so I
may not have noticed all of the "is establishes" alleged ``analyses'' 
which sufficiently clueless readers (and you seem to be successfully
posing as one) may think "irrefutable" unless one tediously, over
and over, cuts them to confetti-size shreds and throws back
into their proponents' faces.  I guess I'm just about ready to drop
off this interminable thread, except presumably for whatever
further dismantling of insults, FUD and disinformation I just
can't resist.


> 5. Use Ruby, be happy.

I earnestly hope you'll start a new cross-thread between c.l.lisp and 
c.l.ruby about first-class functions, macros, case sensitivity, regular
expressions as inherently embedded in the language, and whatever
else can most enflame them -- please leave c.l.ruby out of it, tx.


Alex