Explanation of macros; Haskell macros

[mike420 at ziplip.com]

{newsgroup list trimmed}

>> "Anton van Straaten" <anton at appsolutions.com> writes:
> 
>>>Yes, but the point is that with a concise syntax for lambda, entire
>>>classes of macros can become unnecessary. That's how Smalltalk
>>>handles 'if', for example - no macros or special forms needed.

I keep hearing good (or at least interesting) things about Smalltalk.
But back when I looked at it, I was really unimpressed by its 
community. The mood is generally like "Yeah, Smalltalk is dead,
let's finish the projects we are working on in Smalltalk and
move on". At least we, Lispers, are militant and aim for world
domination. This defeatism discouraged me from seriously studying 
Smalltalk. In addition to short LAMBDA (is it shorter than "\" ?),
what interesting features does Smalltalk have that Lisp does *not* 
have?

By the way, you can have short LAMBDA in Lisp too:

(defmacro \(&rest rest) `(lambda , at rest))