Note that the first part (the one before he types "(quit)") is something you have to do only once - to set up the system itself. Any library in the distribution will install as easily as cl-ppcre did.

With all the talk about "curses" going on right now, I'm pretty happy we lisp hackers actually have something available that integrates so much high-quality software so well.

I think quicklisp is a great system, but didn't asdf do the same thing? It would download and install packages for you just like ql, so I'm wondering what the obvious advantages of ql are over asdf-install, other than being the hot new thing.

There are a number of ways I think Quicklisp improves on asdf-install. Here are a few:

* Quicklisp centralizes metadata and project archives, so you don't have to rely on a world-writable wiki and 10 random servers on the internet to install a project

* Quicklisp doesn't need any external programs like tar or gzip

* It works nicely on Windows

* There is a level of integration testing before projects are published; it's not much, but it's way better than nothing

* It works with projects that don't go through a formal "release a tarball" process

* It can be installed by loading a single Lisp source file

* It's not named asdf-install, so not confusing people about where asdf stops and asdf-install begins

The main way they do the same thing is at a very high level. I think Quicklisp gets more of the important details right.

Thanks for the good response. I'll be taking a closer look into ql as soon as I can.

Also, you can have it both ways: asdf-install is installable via Quicklisp.

and to add to this, they play nicely together, so you can asdf-install a new local version of a package available through quicklisp, and (require 'that-package) will load your newer local version.

Be careful not to confuse ASDF with ASDF-INSTALL.

Great to see quicklisp mentioned here. Hopefully this will stem the tide of "but common lisp has no libraries/package-management systems" comments.

Better late than never.

It's nice to see that I'm not the only one left using that font ( -misc-fixed-medium-r-semicondensed--13-120-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1 ) for my terminals. Anything else bugs me.

I normally use 7x14, but used 6x13 to get a slightly smaller terminal for the screencast.

Off-topic; how did you make the screencast?

byzanz-record with some manual cleanup in GIMP.

it's cool but i kept wanting to pause it any couldn't

If you know exactly what to type.

What to type is documented at www.quicklisp.org.