Folks--

What I'd like to see is some sort of Lisp Standard Library (lsl?)
containing a full suite of packages most of us use in most of our jobs
(whether writing in common lisp or not).  The idea is that we can make
our applications depend on this library rather than on 5 or 10 or 15
libraries located here or there.

I'm thinking: a specification/recommendation, a web page listing, a
redirector for asdf-installability, some notes about which
implementations support all the libraries, and, then, of course, fixing
the libraries to work consistently across the participating
implementations.

(The idea is to choose existing, defacto packages, not to engage (yet)
in some sort of spec writing.)

I'm _not_ saying that the code should all reside in a single,
asdf-installable package, but, rather, that all the components should
stand together, are, perhaps, versioned and released together, or
something like that.  (In other words, while cl-ppcre can be updated and
improved within the 1.0 LSL branch, any significant change would have to
wait for the LSL 1.1 branch).  Or perhaps some other scheme would work:
I don't particularly care which.  The idea, though, is that you install
the LSL, start using it, then install other packages which themselves
depend on the LSL.

The end result is that we have an LSL distribution which at least seems,
from the outside, and to the lisp newbie, to be a unified whole.

What I'm most interested in is a list of the libraries, or genres that
would be covered in such a thing:

 * networking/sockets + trivial
 * threads / concurrency
 * sql
 * web (http, maybe tbnl?)
 * regular-expressions
 * strings (maybe as part of utils?)
 * simple xml (like xmls)
 * full xml (Xpath, sax, dom, etc)
 * gui (cross platform, python has TK, for instance)
 * ffi
 * utils (like split-sequence, getopt, etc)
 * posix

Can anyone think of anything else?  Of course, more can be added over
time. What I'm thinking is that the "standard library" would contain
most of the primitives out of which all the more sophisticated libraries
could be made.  A SOAP lib, for instance, would use the networking and
xml stuff.

The tentative model for this is the Java world in which you've got the
SDK, but then you've got the Jakarta project which has tons of goodness
built on top of that.

Over time, particularly useful libraries would float into the LSL and
we'd get complaints about bloat rather than complaints about scarcity.

Say we picked all the packages for the above and made a grid for how
well those packages worked with each implementation and each other.
We'd then have a good picture of the work that needs to be done.  We
could even issue an "LSL compliant implementation" stamp of approval, or
something like that. ;)

Regardless, I think setting up something like the above would be a great
way to get a picture of the lisp world with regard to libraries, which
is the single biggest complaint for people used to Python, Ruby, Perl
and so on.

What do you all think?

--Keith

---
Keith Irwin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


_______________________________________________
Gardeners mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners

Reply via email to