Common Lisp vs. Scheme

Attribute	Common Lisp	Scheme
Year of first release	1984	1975
Paradigm	Multi-paradigm	Functional
Typing discipline	Dynamic	Dynamic
Garbage collection	Yes	Yes
Macro system	Yes	Yes
Module system	Yes	Yes
Standardization	ANSI Common Lisp	R5RS, R6RS, R7RS

History

Common Lisp and Scheme are two of the oldest and most influential dialects of the Lisp programming language. Common Lisp was developed in the 1980s as a standardized and feature-rich version of Lisp, while Scheme was created in the 1970s as a minimalist and elegant dialect. Common Lisp was designed to be a practical and powerful language for industrial use, while Scheme was intended to be a teaching language with a focus on simplicity and elegance.

Features

Common Lisp is known for its extensive standard library, which includes a wide range of built-in functions and macros for tasks such as file I/O, networking, and object-oriented programming. Scheme, on the other hand, has a much smaller standard library, with a focus on simplicity and minimalism. Common Lisp also has a powerful macro system that allows for metaprogramming, while Scheme's macro system is simpler and more limited.

Syntax

Common Lisp and Scheme have similar syntax, as they are both based on S-expressions and use prefix notation. However, Common Lisp has a more verbose syntax with more parentheses and keywords, while Scheme has a more minimalist syntax with fewer parentheses and keywords. Common Lisp also has a more flexible syntax with support for reader macros, which allow for custom syntax extensions, while Scheme has a more rigid syntax with fewer ways to extend the language.

Metaprogramming

Common Lisp is known for its powerful metaprogramming capabilities, which allow developers to write code that generates and manipulates code at runtime. This is made possible by Common Lisp's powerful macro system, which allows for the creation of custom syntax extensions. Scheme also supports metaprogramming through macros, but its macro system is simpler and more limited compared to Common Lisp.

Object-Oriented Programming

Common Lisp has built-in support for object-oriented programming through the Common Lisp Object System (CLOS), which provides a powerful and flexible way to define classes and objects. Scheme, on the other hand, does not have built-in support for object-oriented programming, but it can be implemented using libraries or by using a different programming paradigm such as functional programming.

Performance

Common Lisp implementations are known for their performance and efficiency, with many compilers and runtime systems optimized for speed. Scheme implementations, on the other hand, tend to be slower and less efficient compared to Common Lisp implementations. This is partly due to the minimalist design of Scheme, which prioritizes simplicity and elegance over performance.

Community and Ecosystem

Common Lisp has a larger and more active community compared to Scheme, with a wide range of libraries, frameworks, and tools available for developers. Common Lisp also has a number of popular implementations, such as SBCL, CCL, and Allegro CL, which are actively maintained and supported. Scheme, on the other hand, has a smaller and more fragmented community, with fewer libraries and tools available for developers.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Common Lisp and Scheme are two distinct dialects of the Lisp programming language with their own strengths and weaknesses. Common Lisp is a feature-rich and powerful language with extensive standard libraries and metaprogramming capabilities, while Scheme is a minimalist and elegant language with a focus on simplicity and elegance. Developers should choose between Common Lisp and Scheme based on their specific needs and preferences, taking into account factors such as performance, metaprogramming capabilities, and community support.