merits of Lisp vs Python

[Robert Uhl]

"Ravi Teja" <webraviteja at gmail.com> writes:

> Mark Tarver wrote:
>>
>> seems to show that Python is a cut down (no macros) version of Lisp
>> with a worse performance.
>
> By that standard, every other mainstream dynamically typed language
> for you is a cut-down version of Lisp with worse performance.

Pretty much;-)

Fewer features, worse performance.  Why use 'em?  In my case, because
the standard library is larger, and because I can get my teammates to
use 'em.

-- 
Robert Uhl <http://public.xdi.org/=ruhl>
When you disarm your subjects you offend them by showing that either
from cowardliness or lack of faith, you distrust them; and either
conclusion will induce them to hate you.
      --Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince