Helmut Eller eller.helmut@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 08 2014, João Távora wrote:
But I'm also not necessarily opposed to recommending, bundling, or installing quicklisp. The latter too seem a little out of SLIME's jurisdiction though.
The problem "How do we get from a vanilla Lisp to one where we can do (require :asdf)" was solved by forcing every implementation to bundle ASDF. IMO, quicklisp is facing a similar problem. Should quicklisp use a similar "bundle it with the implementation" strategy? I think not, because a) it needs a lot of communication b) the bundled version gets outdated quickly.
For what it's worth, I would prefer implementations do not include Quicklisp. I don't like the idea of implementations making divergent code for Quicklisp, and I don't like the idea of the instructions for how to get Quicklisp diverging based on which Lisp you use. (asdf-install was bad in this regard.)
The instructions for Quicklisp are kept intentionally simple as a result:
- download http://beta.quicklisp.org/quicklisp.lisp
- (load "quicklisp.lisp")
Zach