Description
The following reports aim to provide a comprehensive evaluation of Common Lisp libraries from the consumer perspective: features, limitations, ease-of-use, usage examples, implementation runtime, etc.
Green Reports
The following reports have been submitted for peer-review to the "Green Thumbs", and have been accepted as an official Gardener Report.
None so far...
Work in Progress
The following reports are currently underway.
| Name | Inspector(s) | Libraries | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| XML Parser Libraries | Peter K. Lee | xmls, s-xml, cl-xml, cxml, XMLisp | Seeking Volunteers |
| Test Frameworks | Gary King | FiveAM, LispUnit, LIFT, and many more | Seeking Volunteers |
Wish list
Reports that we want to have!
| Topic | Description | Request Date |
|---|---|---|
| Text and String Utility Comparison | There are many packages which duplicate text and string handling (most of the "utilities" include at least a smattering of such). I'd (Gary King) like to see a comparison of what's where possibly in the hopes of creating a unified "best-of-breed" library out of the bits and pieces. This could be rolled into cl-utilities or kept stand alone. | 20 Jan 2006 |
| HTML/XML Markup Languages Comparison | Currently, we have several Lisp markup languages. But we don't know their strengths and weaknesses. It would be great to have a report comparing them in terms of ease of use, expressiveness, extensibility, speed, consing, and so forth. | 20 Jan 2006 |
| Socket Abstraction Layers/Web Servers | There are some really good packages, but some of them don't work on all implementations, some of them has OS specific parts, and so on. | 24 Aug 2006 |
Champion
Peter K. Lee?
Team Members
- ...
Proposal
With the wide collection of Common Lisp libraries scattered across the net, we'd like to have a reliable, well-maintained status report on the rich set of existing libraries in the Common Lisp world today. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive, on-going comparisons of different libraries that do the same or similar things, identify the strengths and weaknesses of each, and provide first-hand usage experiences of each library at hand.
We will strive to be the first step measure in determining possible code revival projects for abandoned libraries by assessing alternatives, as well as code mining projects by evaluating existing libraries for a repackaging effort.
We also believe that the Gardeners Reports project is a great starting point for those new to Common Lisp to get involved, acquiring hands-on experience working with Common Lisp in a meaningful, deeply satisfying way.
We seek to maintain an active communication loop with the library maintenance community, to foster the growth of reuse, innovation, and sharing of ideas.
How to Contribute
Anyone can contribute by requesting a Gardener Report to be written for a particular application problem domain, providing update & feedback to existing Reports, as well as going out and getting your hands dirty with active evaluation of libraries and providing first-hand Report of various Common Lisp libraries out in the world today.
If you want to participate in and/or observe the discussion of the Gardeners Reports, you can subscribe to cl-reports at: http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners-reports
The list archive is available at: http://www.lispniks.com/pipermail/gardeners-reports/
Goal
The Gardeners Reports becomes the de-facto gateway for those new to Common Lisp and experienced lispers alike in functioning as an authoritative guide to picking the right tools for the job at hand.
Milestones
- 10 Green Reports
- 10 active Inspectors
Tasks
ask Peter Seibel for a new mailing list- _ write a Gardeners Report HOWTO for guidelines on report format
Categories
Gardeners Projects