For clojure, there's kern (https://github.com/blancas/kern) for parsec style parser combinators. It's quite easy to use. Ironically, I actually understood parser combinators better by reading its wiki (By understood, I mean understood how to _use_ parser combinators). Parsec was initially difficult to grasp because the type system complicated things for me then.
I only got Parsec completely after that eureka moment when I finally understood Monads.
Why all this hate about Clojure? I didn't downvote you, but I can see why people would, seems olenhad was mentioning a library similar to Parsec in a language that is very related to Common Lisp. There is definitely no need to get carried away.
I am honestly curious what you have against Clojure. I dabbed with CL and Clojure, not as much as I would have liked to, but for me they felt similar. I would be curious to have a list of things that can easily be achieved with CL but not with Clojure.
Common Lisp is a multi-paradigm language (imperative, functional, object-oriented) in the Lisp 1 / Maclisp tradition. It has a language spec and multiple different, but very compatible, implementations. Among its goals are portability across different machines/systems, efficiency, power and stability. Thus complex Lisp software can be ported or written in Common Lisp and usually runs on top of several implementations (examples: Maxima, Axiom, ACL2, ACT-R, Common Lisp Music, ...).
"Clojure is predominantly a functional programming language, and features a rich set of immutable, persistent data structures. When mutable state is needed, Clojure offers a software transactional memory system and reactive Agent system that ensure clean, correct, multithreaded designs."
Things can be both incompatible and related. For any given thing, the set of things related to that thing will typically be bigger than and encompassing of the set of things compatible with that thing.
I guess I don't really get your point. Is Clojure not a pure enough Lisp for your taste, or what? I've used Clojure and CL a similar (small) amount, and they seem incredibly more similar to each other than either of them to Fortran.
For me languages which are fully incompatible and allow no code sharing are not VERY related. Languages VERY related to CL are Emacs Lisp, ISLisp and some other Lisps in the Lisp 1 / Maclisp tradition.
More food for the downvoters: Clojure has been carefully designed such that ZERO code sharing with any other Lisp dialect is possible. That's its definition of 'very related'.
