I would like to read your opinions about the comparison of power and expressivity of Scheme and Common Lisp. I currently only know Scheme, and I want to decide if I should spend more time and effort on this route, or if it is worth learning Common Lisp for me.<p>Specifically, I want to understand if there is anything that can be done in Common Lisp that can't be reasonably easily be expressed using a present-day Scheme system.<p>One thing I read somewhere is that reader macros (which I don't grasp yet) are such a thing.<p>Other thing would be low level macros - but there are Scheme systems that allow you to use define-macro and gensym (non-hygienic macros). Is this (even if more cumbersome) as powerful as the Common Lisp counterpart?<p>Finally, Common Lisp has dynamic scope - but to me it looks like everything that can be done using this could be done using macros that capture variables (which some Scheme systems also support). Am I wrong?
Common Lisp's main advantage over Scheme is that it has been used commercially for years, and has thus accumulated a large number of libraries. Scheme was created as a more consistent and concise Lisp, and is better suited to experimentation.