On 11/12/06, Maciek Pasternacki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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? Sorry, my language was unclear. Your next paragraph more eloquently describes my intentions. Although the Python list is useful as a reference to track against - if we are missing functionality that the Python library has, why?
Cheers Brad > > 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. _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
