> It is substantially more sophisticated than DotLisp and I strongly recommend it, unless you must target .Net.<p>> The idea behind DotLisp was to build a Lisp for .Net that yielded to the CLR those things provided by the CLR that languages normally have to provide themselves:<p>Is the author aware that Rich also implemented ClojureCLR? <a href="http://clojure.org/clojureclr" rel="nofollow">http://clojure.org/clojureclr</a><p>I'm curious how DotLisp improves on the situation provided by clojureclr, especially since "It is substantially more sophisticated than DotLisp".<p>It might be "sharing type system, GC and other runtime services etc., with transparent access to .Net w/o a FFI or wrappers", I am note sure if clojureclr requires wrappers whereas DotLisp doesn't, but I imagine it would be similar to how Clojure proper integrates with the JVM.