>But the language as it exists simply isn't ready for systems work, and (due to its underlying philosophy) probably never will be. One of the flaws with this a

>But the language as it exists simply isn't ready for systems work, and (due to its underlying philosophy) probably never will be. One of the flaws with this argument is insisting that comparisons be made between CL and standard Scheme. No one uses strictly standard Scheme. It's better to think of Scheme as a family of loosely connected languages. I know that both Guile and Racket are languages (and they are their own unique languages) capable of serious systems work. CL is great, too, but I don't know why you keep insisting that it's the only lisp worth using. The Guix developers have shown that Guile can be used successfully for the initial RAM disk, init system, package manager, configuration management system, continuous integration system, web site generator, etc.