merits of Lisp vs Python

[Ravi Teja]

Robert Uhl wrote:
> "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?

Usability. Especially when users quote a very significant difference
here.