>That a footgun can be occasionally be handled carefully does not erase the fact that it's a footgun. You know, there are languages that don't allow you to sho

>That a footgun can be occasionally be handled carefully does not erase the fact that it's a footgun. You know, there are languages that don't allow you to shoot yourself in the foot, because they don't allow any guns. I prefer languages with power. >The ability to modify the read table on the fly is for certain super interesting, but IMHO very dangerous. > I am glad that the languages I use on a daily basis do not have this capability, for certain. Reader macros are there to be used when they are necessary. And in those cases, they make ALL the difference in the world. In such cases, the "languages that do not have this capability" will require a lot of code, often hard to maintain, to achieve the same result. So, i prefer languages with guns. >Macros like these are un-lispy, and really never should have been included. LOOP wasn't included on a whim. Read about the Common Lisp standard creation, it was based on at least a decade of experience writing Lisp for "serious" stuff.