A critic of Guido's blog on Python's lambda

[Michele Simionato]

Alex Martelli wrote:
 yes, if that was my only
> choice, I'd much rather use small, simple Scheme than huge, complicated,
> rich, powerful Common Lisp.  ((But in this case I'm biased by early
> experiences, since when I learned and used Lisp-ish languages there WAS
> no Common Lisp, while Scheme was already there, although not quite the
> same language level as today, I'm sure;-)).

Alas, today Scheme is not minimal at all. I mean, the document
describing the standard is short, but real implementations are pretty
rich.
I am also surprised by your claim in this thread that Scheme macros are
simpler than
Common Lisp macros;  perhaps, you are not familiar with syntax-case.
BTW, there is still research going on on macros, for instance look at
http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-72/srfi-72.html which is pretty nice.
Just to bring some info in yet another useless usenet flamewar.

    Michele Simionato