On Setting Orange, The Aftermath 53, 3172 YOLD, Brad Beveridge wrote: > One of the catch phrases of Python is that it comes with "batteries > included". About the last thing that a standard Common Lisp > implementation can be accused of is that it comes with all the > trimmings. There are certainly plenty of really nice libraries out > there, but not in the same organised way as Python.
Good point. > I propose that we clone this page http://docs.python.org/lib/lib.html, > and emulate as much as possible. > The CL-Batteries should be installable from ASDF-install. It should > have good documentation (again, look to the Python example), and > should be portable across as many implementations as possible - though > I suggest we choose an implementation to work to first. > > Thoughts? Why clone libraries which are tuned to other language? Why emulate Python in Lisp? CL-Batteries as such, OTOH, seems to be a Good Idea. It might be a dependency-only package that would pull commonly used libraries and save users effort of downloading each one separately (and/or discovering them at all). I'd start with Iterate, CL-PPCRE, Anaphora and/or Arnesi (last one isn't a no-brainer, but I find it *very* usable), SPLIT-SEQUENCE, SLIME, CL-FAD, trivial-sockets, trivial-http, bordeaux-threads, puri, net-telent-date, maybe some MOP compatibility layer... that's what I have currently in mind, list should probably be a lot longer. -- __ Maciek Pasternacki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ http://japhy.fnord.org/ ] `| _ |_\ / { ...you claimed all this time that you would die for me, ,|{-}|}| }\/ why then are you so surprised when you hear your own eulogy... } \/ |____/ ( M. J. Keenan ) -><- _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
