merits of Lisp vs Python

[Ramon Diaz-Uriarte]

On 09 Dec 2006 03:16:45 -0800, Paul Rubin
<"http://phr.cx"@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> "Ramon Diaz-Uriarte" <rdiaz02 at gmail.com> writes:
> > a) "old-fashioned"? Is that supposed to be an argument? I guess
> > addition and multiplication are old-fashioned, and so is calculus;so?
> > I think "old-fashioned" should only carry a negative connotation in
> > the fashion world, not in programming.
>
> If someone handed you a calculus book written in Latin, you'd probably
> find it undesirably old-fashioned too.
>

I think the "reasoning by analogy" is clearly showing its weakness
here (truth is, it was me who used the analogy to begin with). However
since (and this is no cynicism) I do really respect and find thought
provoking most of what you write,

how is Lisp similar to a calculus book written in Latin (or to the
Latin in the calculus book, or whatever)? What exactly is
"old-fashioned" supposed to mean here, and how does it carry a truly
negative connotation?

R.

P.D. I am only now starting with Lisp, after having written a lot of
Python for the last two years.
-- 
Ramon Diaz-Uriarte
Statistical Computing Team
Structural Biology and Biocomputing Programme
Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO)
http://ligarto.org/rdiaz