If I had to guess I would say the overlap is not as sizeable as you think, at least in the Common Lisp and Scheme camps. Python really has very few things in c

If I had to guess I would say the overlap is not as sizeable as you think, at least in the Common Lisp and Scheme camps. Python really has very few things in common with Lisp and its philosophy is in many ways orthogonal to the philosophy of Lisp. From the idiotic moto "There should be one — and preferably only one — obvious way to do it" (which isn't even true in Python-land) to all the compromises that Python accepted to attract marketshare that would make any hardened Lisp user want to barf, it's crystal clear to me that Python makes an even worse platform than the JVM for Lisp. Some examples of serious differences between Python and Common Lisp - that would make any serious CL user run away from Python/Hy - are: + CL (like Smalltalk) is a fully interactive language. Python's focus on interactivity is minimal if not entirely unproductive. Approaches like Jupyter come across as terrible hacks that lack most of the features that matter to people immersed in Lisp. + CL can be very performant. Implementations like SBCL can produce native code competitive with C compilers. + CL is truly multiparadigm (one can do imperative, functional, OOP, logic, aspect, nondeterministic, lazy, parallel/multicore and not feel as if the language is fighting him every step of the way). Python has too many limitations for that to be true. + Lisp feels conceptually clean and internally consistent. The metacircular evaluator is a thing of beauty. Python feels like a collection of gross hacks and adhoc rules thrown together by humans who didn't know better.