How explain why Python is easier/nicer than Lisp which has a simpler grammar/syntax?

[Marco Sulla]

On Fri, 7 Aug 2020 at 19:41, Christian Seberino <cseberino at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think this is really significant point why more syntax does necessarily mean less readability.

I don't think so. Readability of programming languages was measured
using an objective method, and Python was one of the most readable.

The fact that a grammar is simpler does not mean it's more readable
for human beings. It's surely most simple to optimize for compilers.
For example, RISC instructions in CPUs were simpler than CISC. Even if
Intel tried to defend CISC, modern Intel CPUs have reduced their set
of instructions a lot. Furthermore, the majority of smartphone CPUs
are ARM, that have RISC instructions.
Think also about NAND. You can express the whole boolean logic using
only NAND or NOR. In the beginning, only the Military and NASA
constructed electrical circuits only with NAND or NOR gates. Now there
are electronic circuits made for common people, using only or mainly
NAND gates: they are, for example, pen cards and SSD drives.

But they are not simpler to understand. For example, in math you
*could* think a*b as a+a done b times. But what if a and b are
imaginary numbers?

There are many programmers that just feel Python much more simple to
read and use. Google can tell you a lot about this. Also Rosetta code
can show it to you clearly:
http://www.rosettacode.org/wiki/Rosetta_Code

It seems to me that you want to convince your colleagues that Python
is better than Lisp. I think that:

1. there's not a "best". The "best" depends heavily on what you need.
2. the people you have to convince is only yourselves
3. to convince yourselves, you have to try. "Refuse the temptation to guess" :)