Python vs. Lisp -- please explain

[Alexander Schmolck]

"Fredrik Lundh" <fredrik at pythonware.com> writes:

> Alexander Schmolck wrote:
> 
> > My point was that Guido probably (and fortunately!) was unaware of the extent
> > to which you can have both dynamism and speed

For the convenience of other readers, allow me to restore the snipped second
half of that sentence: "... and the extent to which very
dynamic languages are suitable for writing robust software."
 
> any my point was that chosing to ignore something doesn't mean
> that you're ignorant.

    Interviewer: "You said originally you thought 500 lines would be a big
       Python program." 
    Guido van Rossum: "That was just my lack of imagination."

    <http://www.artima.com/intv/pyscale3.html>


    Guido van Rossum: "Another thing, much farther in the future, is
      compilation to C or machine code. I used to think that this was impossible
      and (perhaps because of that) uninteresting, but recent experiments (like
      Armin Rigo's Psyco and Greg Ewing's Pyrex) suggest that this will
      eventually be possible. It should provide Python with an incredible
      performance boost and remove many of the reasons why many people are still
      reluctant to switch to Python."
  
    <http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/python/2002/06/04/guido.html?page=1>
    
 
> (but since you keep repeating this nonsense, it's clear that you're
> pretty ignorant wrt. software design.  too much CS exposure?).
 
Indeed. Your amazing reading comprehesion and lucid argumentation would
obviously be lost on my posts.

'as