From whence Lisp envy?

[Courageous]

>Python has a lot of things in common with scheme. To me, the most
>important is that everything in it went in after careful thought...

Given Guido's expression of regret on the subject, I'd perhaps except
lambdas from this. :)

>Except for macros. Macros were hard to do right in scheme, and I've
>heard lispers denigrate them. I suspect it will be even harder to do
>macros right for Python. Especially since one of the goals *has* to be
>avoiding what happened to the lisp community.

Note that if you apply the module naming rules to macros in
the same way that you do functions and other out-of-module references,
you can't have anything like the Lisp explosion of macros-that-
are-indistinguishable-from-the-language, precisely because of
the elegant (and IMO _correct_) way that Python handles modules.

C//