> Clojure and Racket are in that category. They lack the full power of CL; so they're just Lisp-syntax languages, not an actual Lisp. That's pretty debatable t

> Clojure and Racket are in that category. They lack the full power of CL; so they're just Lisp-syntax languages, not an actual Lisp. That's pretty debatable that Clojure and Racket lack the "full power of Common Lisp". For one, they're all three different languages, each one having something the other doesn't. And another is that Racket is not a Lisp and doesn't purport to be. It's very much in the Scheme camp, but even then it is clearly it's own thing.