merits of Lisp vs Python

[Mathias Panzenboeck]

Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> Mathias Panzenboeck a écrit :
>> Rob Thorpe wrote:
>>
>>> Mathias Panzenboeck wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mark Tarver wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> How do you compare Python to Lisp?  What specific advantages do you
>>>>> think that one has over the other?
>>>>>
>>>>> Note I'm not a Python person and I have no axes to grind here. 
>>>>> This is
>>>>> just a question for my general education.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I do not know much about Lisp. What I know is:
>>>> Python is a imperative, object oriented dynamic language with duck
>>>> typing,
>>>
>>> Yes, but Python also supports the functional style to some extent.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I currently visit a course about functional programming at the
>> university of technology vienna:
>> python implements only a small subset of things needed to be called a
>> functional language (list
>> comprehension).
> 
> Python has functions as first-class objects (you can pass functions as
> arguments to functions, return functions from functions, and bind
> functions to identifiers), and that's the only thing you need to use a
> functional approach.

You mean like function pointers in C and C++? I think this should be possible in assembler, too.
I thought functional languages have to be declarative?
The boost C++ library has even lambdas!