> You could just as easily serialize Python code and eval it. That seems to be the consensus among all the people replying to me. :-) Fair enough. The differen

> You could just as easily serialize Python code and eval it. That seems to be the consensus among all the people replying to me. :-) Fair enough. The difference I see is that lots of Lisp authors praise "no syntax" and code-as-data, so it seems to be encouraged, whereas I don't see Python programmers encouraging use of eval. Lisp seems designed for this kind of meta-programming. And it's really cool! It just makes me nervous. As an outsider, I really appreciate the responses from you all. Basically you seem to be saying, "It's not an issue. We use it for macros, not for untrusted inputs. Don't call eval and you're fine." Obviously I wouldn't want you to do anything else. :-) Anyway, thanks for the replies. It's great to have a community where I can ask Lisp users about something like this and learn what they think! It's something I've wondered about for a long time.