[pro] what lisp command line arg parser is good?

[Mark H. David]

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 do one that organizes
them by category, e.g., command line parser, and then gives all the info 
on one page about them,
like a Wikipedia style table of all the info?  I don't find it that 
fun/productive to search variants of my keyword,
then depth-first-searching all of them, which involves: click one, check 
its summary doc (if any), then click
the home page, then click around there for doc, etc.... Just in you 
all's spare time, eh? :)

Or, perhaps Manifest can do this automagically some day: that would 
totally rock!)

Didier, your library looks by far the most complete, but therefore it's 
a bit daunting.
But many + points for speaking up and showing some interest.
Plus I saw Don't need LW nor ACL.  Your package is now the leading 
candidate!
-Mark

On 12/20/2011 12:08 PM, Didier Verna wrote:
> "Mark H. David"<mhd at yv.org>  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.fr/~didier/software/lisp/clon.php
>
>> Must be quicklisp readable
>    Yes.
>
>> Just something simple
>    It's not really "simple", but look at the quickstart from the user
> manual. This will get you started quickly.
>
>> Widely used would be good
>    Probably not.
>
>> well maintained.
>    Yes.
>
>
> Probably the most important caveat, currently, is that it's not tested
> (and probably won't work) in ACL or LispWork because it requires
> features that are not available in the free editions. I hope to fix that
> soon however.
>