Was expecting rather more depth to the comparison, given the title. There's far too little substance to justify his conclusion that Factor "lies way above Lisp," though it seems that supporting that assertion may not have even been his intent.<p>I feel like I must be missing something with regard to the first question, though. He claims Factor macros are both simpler and more composable than Lisp macros, but neither his explanation nor the linked documentation seem to actually provide any evidence. In particular, as far as I can tell, Factor macros are "composable" in just the same way Lisp ones are: you can nest them and use values obtained from one in another without issue. He then goes on to comment on hygiene in a way that suggests he's not even talking about Lisp macros in general, which in many incarnations are free to violate hygiene.