Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[prunesquallor at comcast.net]

james anderson <james.anderson at setf.de> writes:

>> 
>> The advantage of HOFs over macros is simplicity: You don't need additional
>> language constructs
>
> when did common-lisp macros become an "additional language construct"?

That's what macros do:  they add new language constructs.

I think that many Scheme students inadvertantly get taught `macros = evil'.

> the other reason is that when i moved from scheme to lisp, in the
> process of porting the code which i carried over, it occurred to me that much
> of what i was using higher-order functions for could be expressed more clearly
> with abstract classes and appropriately defined generic function method combinations.

I also think that many Scheme students are mislead and inadvertantly
taught that one should avoid everything but LAMBDA.