[cltl3-devel] RFC: CLtL3 Charter

[Malcolm Reynolds]

> Section 2 of the charter mentions a 'standard library', which will
> include sockets and networking code. It is a lot easier, as a
> community,  to ship a library than it is implementation-specific code.
> You, as a user, would use the 'standard library' and not care.

Okay, this is sounds good. Essentially my point would come down to "it
should be easy to do networking in CLtL3" and if the path of least
resistance is to standardise FFI and streams then that definitely
makes sense.

I definitely appreciate your point about it not necessarily being
about making CL easier for newcomers, as clearly a lot of the complex
and initially confusing stuff is what, in the end, makes it a good
language. As long as the end user experience of writing network code
is (approximately) as simple as in newer scripting languages, I agree
that whether you're using a standard library or standardised language
features makes no odds, and so the approach of keeping it simple in
order to make for an easy (ish!) standardisation process is the right
choice.

Malcolm