Why is Python popular, while Lisp and Scheme aren't?

[holger krekel]

Michael Hudson wrote:
> "Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at udel.edu> writes:
> 
> > There was much discussion about which of dict.iterkeys(), iteritems(),
> > or itervalues() should be the default for 'in dict' both for 'if key
> > in dict' and 'for key in dict'.  Note that since 'in seq' means same
> > sequence in both contexts for other containers (and same underlying
> > code is used to get sequence) it was wanted to keep 'in dict' meaning
> > same also.  The consensus, considering use cases for both
> > constructions, was that keys are most ofter what is wanted.  Think 'is
> > word in dictionary' rather than 'is word,definition in dictionary'.
> > Normal use of phonebook is similar.
> 
> For what it's worth (not much) I'm forever writing 
> 
> for k, v in d:
>     ....
> 
> I can see the arguments for consistency, but I think this is my most
> reliable Python error at the moment.

TypeError: unpack non-sequence

is also my number one "basic" error i am producing.
But why don't i get it?  My subconscious reasoning seems
to insist that 'for ... in y' should iterate over *everything* in y
not just some part of it. 

or-so'ly holger