merits of Lisp vs Python

[Brian Adkins]

John Nagle wrote:
>    Neither Lisp nor Python is an "industrial strength language".
> The infrastructure is too weak.  Hosting providers and distro
> makers aren't concerned over whether Python works.  They
> care if C, C++, Java, PHP, and Perl work, but not Python or LISP.
> Ask them.
> 
>                 John Nagle

In your excitement to post a sweeping and inaccurate generalization (you 
missed diss'ing Ruby), I think you may have missed the point of my post. 
I surely wasn't trying to restart a dead thread, I just thought it was 
funny that there was a similarity to a line from Princess Bride in the 
thread (see relevant part below that you cut out).

If you want to restart a debate, please go back and reply to some 
serious post in the thread - don't hijack mine for your own evil 
purposes and cut out the good parts - did you even see the movie?

George Sakkis wrote:
 > You keep using that phrase. I don't think it means what you think it
 > means.

[Vizzini has just cut the rope The Dread Pirate Roberts is climbing up]
Vizzini: HE DIDN'T FALL? INCONCEIVABLE.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what 
you think it means.