merits of Lisp vs Python

[JShrager at gmail.com]

> ... you can't implement Python generators as Lisp macros in any reasonable
> way.  You could do them in Scheme using call-with-current-continuation
> but Lisp doesn't have that.

Well, okay, Scheme [same thing (to me), although I realize that they
aren't, quite -- and CWCC is one place where they aren't!] But I don't
follow why you can't come very close by appropriate macrification of
closures. OTOH, this could be my lack of knowledge; it's possible that
Python has somehow gone beyond what one can reasonably do in this way.
But anyway, this wasn't the point of my post; rather, my point was that
Python can't be extended at all (or at least not in the same way that
Lisp can be), not that a given extension can or cannot be done in Lisp.