Python is a subset of lisp

what can you do in lisp that you cant do in python

(((CLisp)))
Fixed it for you.

nothing, most languages are turing complete. you can do the same things in lisp as you can with javascript. One is shit, the other is lisp. That's all.

so they're subsets of each other (i.e. equal)

JavaScript is Scheme

lisp is not a subset of python. You will never take a modern python compiler and have a lisp fall out of it.

you're so retarded it's painful

norvig.com/lispy.html

your life is a python library

that lisp doesn't do as many things as common lisp or scheme does nor does it execute programs as quickly

The most powerful programming language is Lisp. If you don't know Lisp (or its variant, Scheme), you don't know what it means for a programming language to be powerful and elegant. Once you learn Lisp, you will see what is lacking in most other languages.

Unlike most languages today, which are focused on defining specialized data types, Lisp provides a few data types which are general. Instead of defining specific types, you build structures from these types. Thus, rather than offering a way to define a list-of-this type and a list-of-that type, Lisp has one type of lists which can hold any sort of data.

Where other languages allow you to define a function to search a list-of-this, and sometimes a way to define a generic list-search function that you can instantiate for list-of-this, Lisp makes it easy to write a function that will search any list — and provides a range of such functions.

In addition, functions and expressions in Lisp are represented as data in a way that makes it easy to operate on them.

When you start a Lisp system, it enters a read-eval-print loop. Most other languages have nothing comparable to `read', nothing comparable to `eval', and nothing comparable to `print'. What gaping deficiencies!

>that lisp isn't as good as this lisp

literally too retarded to understand the power of macros

It doesn't matter how good your macros are if you compile down to python as your base language you dingus

They're the same set due to Turing equivalence.

Lisp is a subset of css3.

python can not do everying lisp can do. They can both solve any mathematical problem but python is limited in terms of how it is allowed to solve the problem and how quickly the problem will be solved. Lisp is not because it can rewrite itself completely at runtime. You can solve the problem in any way that is possible to the processor in lisp.

Absolutely irrelevant, just write Lisp interpreter in Python.

An interpreter is simply not able to do everything that a just in time COMPILER can do you dense onions boy. The funny thing is you are not even trolling me trying to get me to flame you. The average programmer is just that stupid.

Compilers are a subset of interpreters.

>An interpreter is simply not able to do everything that a just in time COMPILER can
Yep, it can do more.

Since all real programming languages are turing complete, they all provide equivalent computational power.
Therefore, their differences exist in their interfacing. For this reason, languages that provide hardware-level interfacing are the most powerful, followed by those with access to external compiled libraries, then those with large in-environment libraries, and last of all, those whose interfaces are minimal (character input/output) or non-existant altogether (in which case, the computation performed is unusable, but has been performed nonetheless)

Lisp is gay

This is simply not true. All turing complete langauges can solve any mathematical problem. That does not mean that they can all solve the problem as quickly. Some languages have limitations in terms of speed.

Some languages also have restrictions in terms of syntax, or the way that you write the language.

For example you can define a variant of python where between every ascii character you must write the phrase
"the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog."

The code 2+2 would be

the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog2the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog+the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog2thequick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog

Such a langauge is just as "turing complete" as python, but without macros you have no way of weaseling your way out of writing that string every time.

You can write an interpreter in that language that circumvents the rule but that will naturally be at least 10 times slower than the language that the interpreter runs on.

get out of here brainlet

It's lisp by spec you literal brainlet.

Execution speed is not part of the definition of any language. Your post is therefore literal shit.

If it compiles to python and not assembly it's gobshite.

Attached: FqsKovY.jpg (450x566, 40K)

Turing machines aren't capable of solving all mathematical problems.

See the halting problem for further details.

this image should be one circle.

>what is cython

(((((((((((((((((((((((elegant)))))))))))))))))))))))

the halting problem isn't a mathematical problem it's an unsolvable problem.

(fuck 'niggers)

python-flavored c++, nothing to do with python.

are you retarded? cython is a python->c compiler which you can use to make ASM binaries.

Jesus fucking christ the people on this board know absolutely nothing

t. never looked at cython for even 0.01 seconds

Lisp is a subset of Assembly

No.

this is true but programming in raw machine code is much harder than coding in lisp and also your code won't be portable