Typically Scheme is seen as less "real world" than Common Lisp but specific Scheme implementations (such as PLT) can be very much real world. Common Lisp gives you more out of the box (i.e. the same between implementations) but depending on what part of the real world you want to deal with you may still need to have small amounts of implementation specific code. Then there are various subtle differences between the languages and surrounding cultures that partisans can fight about forever.
I could also quote from the (not very complete) Lisp FAQ at <http://www.lispniks.com/faq/faq.html#s7q1> Is Scheme a Lisp? Yes. Anyway, the Scheme standard (R5RS) says it is. ("Scheme is a statically scoped and properly tail-recursive dialect of the Lisp programming language.") On the other hand, Scheme and Common Lisp, while sharing an intellectual legacy and a number of important characteristics, also differ in ways just subtle enough to stir up a good old fashion religious war. Consequently, Scheme vs. Common Lisp discussions almost never go well. And you may run across prominent Common Lispers who will argue—in an angels on a pinhead kind of way—that Scheme is not in fact a Lisp. You may also hear folks who say "Scheme is not Lisp", meaning, Scheme is not the end-all-and-be-all of possible Lisp dialects. This is usually said in conversations with people turned off "Lisp" forever by a bad undergraduate experience with Scheme. Ultimately Scheme and Common Lisp differ in their history and their current communities of users. Scheme was invented in order to test out certain theories of language design and continues to be used by people interested in having a small, simply defined language for further language research and pedagogy. Which is not to say that's the only way Scheme is used, but it helps give the Scheme community its particular flavor. Common Lisp, on the other hand, is the offspring of the systems-programming Lisps of the Artificial Intelligence boom. It continues to be an important AI language and is now used largely by people who care more about raw power and writing software than they do about conceptual purity and good pedagogy. Again, this is a portrait in broad strokes but there is truth in it. As an intellectual exercise, learning both Scheme and Common Lisp will enrich your understanding of the platonic ideal of Lisp and of programming in general. As a practical matter, if you do learn both, you'll likely gravitate to one or the other based on your own predilections and the kind of projects you are interested in. -Peter P.S. This list is more or less specific to Common Lisp but I'm happy to have a discussion going here as long as it stays civil. On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 1:58 PM, nubis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi everybody, > I recently came across plt scheme, through Common Lisp, I've never got a > chance to work with common lisp, I'm mostly a python web guy. But when I > found Scheme my first thought was "this is a 'real world' lisp", I know > I can find the differences between them STFW (already found some of > them), but I want your informated subjective opinion. What are the > biggest differences technical and culturally between Common Lisp and Plt > Scheme. Which kind of people uses each one? > > > And also I don't like this list to be so quiet, I know most members know > lots of things I would like to know myself, please share :) > > ----nubis :) > http://woobiz.com.ar > > _______________________________________________ > Gardeners mailing list > Gardeners@lispniks.com > http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners > -- Peter Seibel http://www.codersatwork.com/ http://www.gigamonkeys.com/blog/ _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list Gardeners@lispniks.com http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
