"Mark H. David" wrote:
> Didier, your library looks by far the most complete, but therefore
> it's a bit daunting.
Feedback welcome. I have some ideas on how to make it even simpler to
use for simple apps. One suggestion from pcos was to define a "main"
function, the arglist of which would rep
Hi Mark,
On 21/12/2011, at 2:23 AM, Mark H. David wrote:
> Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
> There seem to be n of them out there. None really stands out, that I can
> tell.
> Must be quicklisp readable,
I have one called lisp-executable. It is available
Hi Mark and the others,
On 20 dec. 2011, at 18:25, "Mark H. David" wrote:
> Didier, your library looks by far the most complete, but therefore it's a bit
> daunting.
I have used CLON here:
-
http://github.com/aerique/google-ai-challenge-2011-1-ants/blob/master/src-play-game/play-game.lisp
-
"Mark H. David" writes:
> Well, in the era of Quicklisp, they're all pretty much equally easy. Next?
>
> On 12/20/2011 11:48 AM, Sam Steingold wrote:
>>> * Mark H. David [2011-12-20 11:23:17
>>> -0500]:
>>>
>>> Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
>>> There
Faré writes:
> Finally, if you're ready to accept SBCL only, Xach has something as
> part of buildapp.
> http://www.xach.com/lisp/buildapp/
Buildapp doesn't really do anything reusable for command-line arguments.
Robert Brown's "lisp-gflags" seems interesting.
Zach
___
Yes, I think "n" is pretty big. I seem to find new ones all the time.
There's no single list of them.
You just have to keep trying search with variants like "command-line"
"command line" "getopt" etc.!
(OT: there really are "n", and it's not that small now, Lisp library
guides. Can someone
"Mark H. David" wrote:
> Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
Yes.
> There seem to be n of them out there.
Is n that big ?
> None really stands out, that I can tell.
Damn. I need a Ph.D. in communication I guess :-) Try out mine:
http://www.lrde.epita
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:23, Mark H. David wrote:
> Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
> There seem to be n of them out there. None really stands out, that I can
> tell.
> Must be quicklisp readable, other than that, I don't have any kind of fancy
> requireme
Well, in the era of Quicklisp, they're all pretty much equally easy. Next?
On 12/20/2011 11:48 AM, Sam Steingold wrote:
* Mark H. David [2011-12-20 11:23:17 -0500]:
Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
There seem to be n of them out there. None really stands
> * Mark H. David [2011-12-20 11:23:17 -0500]:
>
> Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
> There seem to be n of them out there. None really stands out, that I
> can tell.
in such situation the usual answer is to use whatever is easier to install.
--
Sam Steing
Anyone with some thoughts on which command line parser is good to use?
There seem to be n of them out there. None really stands out, that I
can tell.
Must be quicklisp readable, other than that, I don't have any kind of fancy
requirements. Just something simple, and reliable. Widely used would
11 matches
Mail list logo
