The value that Parenscript adds here is the same as for programs that run in a web browser: you write your JS in a Lispy way at a higher level of abstraction, mostly because you get the full power of Lisp macros. There are other wins too, but that's the big one. The runtime environment, though, is entirely JS, because PS is a compiler that targets JS.
So I still don't see a difference in intent here between what PS is good for and what you're doing. I don't want to discourage you at all. Just curious about the differentiator.
* only requirement is node.js and the lisp source distribution, no other dependencies. * ability to debug lisp code from the browser. * immutable data structures.
I feel I can implement a lisp that can run the examples in <i>Let Over Lambda</i> in a couple of weeks. The lisp won't be as stable as Parenscript but that's ok. Only at that point can the real work start of building the web framework that is lisp.js. I think the most important bit for me is to have a base that I can modify as the needs arise. I'm already trying to include as many lisp concepts in the test source as I can find to make sure lisp.js is a general purpose lisp. In that respect I'm setting several goals: get lisp-in-lisp working, get Let Over Lambda examples working, ... any other useful lisp constructs that I come across. That's a journey I can only make if I do my own lisp implementation.
I am using Node on the backend of http://tryparenscript.com/ simply because it was easier to get up and running than Hunchentoot. Source code is on GitHub, if you want to check it out: http://github.com/fitzgen/tryparenscript.com
Here is the "Hello, WOrld!" example from the NodeJS homepage in ParenScript:
(defvar *http* (require "http"))
(chain *http*
(create-server (lambda (req res)
((@ res write-head) 200
(create "Content-Type"
"text/plain"))
((@ res end) "Hello, World!\n")))
(listen 8124 "127.0.0.1"))
((@ console log) "Server running at http://127.0.0.1:8124/")