Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Terry Reedy]

"Pascal Bourguignon" <spam at thalassa.informatimago.com> wrote in
message news:87ekxfmhhl.fsf at thalassa.informatimago.com...
>
> prunesquallor at comcast.net writes:
> > Since having the correct amount of whitespace is *vital* to the
> > correct operation of a Python program, it seems that the task of
> > maintaining it is made that much more difficult because it is only
> > conspicuous by its absence.

> That remembers me that when  the languages had significant spaces,
the
> programming was  done with forms, sheets of  physical paper
preprinted
> with empty spaces:
[further idiocy snipped]

I do believe that several Lispers have suggested that people should
give Lisp a fair trial before rejecting it on account of parentheses
or macros.  The same goes, of course, for Python and significant
indents/dedents.  For most people who try Python, freedom from
visually redundant fences is a feature.  Those who find it a bother
after trying are welcome to chose another language.

What makes the comments above doubly absurd is that Lisp has as much
or more need for 'significant spaces' as Python.  Compare (1,2,3)
versus (1 2 3).  Having the "correct amount of whitespace is *vital*
to the correct operation of a" Lisp program as much as for any other.
Do Lispers therefore use forms?  I suspect not ;-)

Terry J. Reedy