I V wrote: > To be a little provocative, I wonder if the idea that you're "talking to > the interpreter" doesn't apply more to lisp than to python; you can have > any syntax you like, as long as it looks like an AST.
Actually, that is false. You can have any syntax you like in Common Lisp. For instance, the syntax of Python: http://trac.common-lisp.net/clpython/ What thesaurus are you using which lists "provocative" as a synonym for "uninformed"? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
