Tim Cross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So, what would we want in a ranking? Well, possibly, we would want > some indication of the number of implementations supported, the number > of general bugs, the number of implementation specific bugs, a measure > of functionality, ease of use and possibly 'lispiness'. Maybe we could > assign 2 points for each lisp implementation supported, -1 point for > each general (non-implementation related) bug, -0.5 for each > implementation specific bug, and average of all scores out of 5 for > functionality, an average of all scores for ease of use and an average > of scores for 'lispiness'. > Also, something like linkit for lisp libraries would be also useful and interesting. Where subscribed users have the option of ranking and making comments on library and its usefulness. This will make it easier to decide which library to pick when there are several different implementations of the same thing.
Cheers. -- Surendra Singhi http://www.public.asu.edu/~sksinghi/index.html The best-laid plans of mice and men go oft astray. _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
