Software Alternatives, Accelerators & Startups

TinyScheme VS CMU Common Lisp

Compare TinyScheme VS CMU Common Lisp and see what are their differences

TinyScheme logo TinyScheme

D. Souflis, J. Shapiro - TinyScheme Download site

CMU Common Lisp logo CMU Common Lisp

CMUCL is a high-performance, free Common Lisp implementation.
  • TinyScheme Landing page
    Landing page //
    2022-02-13
  • CMU Common Lisp Landing page
    Landing page //
    2019-04-15

TinyScheme features and specs

No features have been listed yet.

CMU Common Lisp features and specs

  • High-Performance Compiler
    CMU Common Lisp features an efficient native code compiler that can produce highly optimized code for the supported platforms, enhancing performance for computationally-intensive applications.
  • Extensive Library Support
    Includes a wide variety of libraries, providing functionality ranging from numerical computing to system interfacing, which allows developers to implement diverse applications without relying heavily on external packages.
  • Strong Typing System
    CMUCL provides a strong type system with good error detection and optimization capabilities that can help catch errors at compile-time and improve runtime performance.
  • Garbage Collection
    It includes an efficient garbage collector that manages memory naturally, minimizing manual intervention and reducing memory leaks and fragmentation in applications.
  • Comprehensive Integrated Development Environment
    CMUCL comes with an integrated environment which includes a debugger, inspector, and an interface for efficient development and troubleshooting.

Possible disadvantages of CMU Common Lisp

  • Limited Platform Support
    The number of platforms explicitly supported by CMUCL is limited, which can be a constraint for developers who need to work across multiple or newer systems.
  • Steep Learning Curve
    Newcomers might find CMUCL challenging due to its complexity and the intricate features specific to Lisp, requiring a steep learning curve compared to more modern languages and environments.
  • Outdated Documentation
    Some users find the documentation to be outdated or not comprehensive enough, making it difficult to get started and fully leverage the system's capabilities.
  • Limited Community Support
    The user and contributor community for CMUCL is relatively small compared to other languages and projects, which may result in less frequent updates and fewer third-party resources.
  • Complex Setup Process
    Initial setup and configuration of CMUCL can be cumbersome, especially for users not familiar with Lisp environments or those who require specific custom configurations.

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to TinyScheme and CMU Common Lisp)
OOP
52 52%
48% 48
Programming Language
39 39%
61% 61
IDE
40 40%
60% 60
Text Editors
0 0%
100% 100

User comments

Share your experience with using TinyScheme and CMU Common Lisp. For example, how are they different and which one is better?
Log in or Post with

What are some alternatives?

When comparing TinyScheme and CMU Common Lisp, you can also consider the following products

Lua - Powerful, fast, lightweight, embeddable scripting language

Steel Bank Common Lisp - Steel Bank Common Lisp (SBCL) is a high performance Common Lisp compiler.

LIPS Scheme - Scheme based powerful lisp interpreter written in JavaScript

CLISP - CLISP is a portable ANSI Common Lisp implementation and development environment by Bruno Haible.

Gambit - Cross-platform chess game.

Clozure Common Lisp - Clozure CL (often called CCL for short) is a free Common Lisp implementation with a long history.