J.C. Roberts wrote:
> Any insight would be appreciated.
Apart from the specific recommendations, it's probably also worth
mentioning that it's hard to paint yourself into a corner by choosing
one specific CL implementation since Common Lisp is exceptionally good
at changing your approach very late in the game. If you keep the
implementation-specific dependencies well separated, there is not much
that can go wrong. There are examples of pieces of software that have
been implementation-specific in the past but have been ported to other
implementatios later on (for example AllegroServe) because there was
apparently enough interest to do so.
I think it's more important to see more good Lisp software, so whatever
helps you to get your work done is a good thing (tm). Trying to solve
all problems at once isn't necessarily the best approach...
Pascal
--
My website: http://p-cos.net
Closer to MOP & ContextL:
http://common-lisp.net/project/closer/