> How do you think those Java libraries got made? Java has also long had a culture of roll your own libraries -- and you had to, because the base language and s

> How do you think those Java libraries got made? Java has also long had a culture of roll your own libraries -- and you had to, because the base language and standard library were quite deficient. That’s quite a silly argument. Basically no language has all the things I pointed out in the core library. By this definition every language community is the same, which is obviously not true. Also, the Java standard library is pretty damned big compared to CL. > Where Java won out was copying Perl et al. of having a centralized place anyone could upload open source You’re rewriting history a bit here. Java didn’t start with a central repository, it was shipped nearly a decade after Java was released. This wasn’t a planned decision by the Java team, but a consequence of decisions made by the community. CL could’ve done this decades ago too, but they’ve been very slow to the party. I also believe that QL’s plan of manually approving every new library is putting unnecessary friction in the process. > It really seems like you just want CL to get the libraries and tooling you expect from the Java world, especially stuff mostly used by big companies with big deployments. Not personally, no. I’ve worked in CL, and I did not enjoy it. I do not suffer from “grass is greener” syndrome, and I’m perfectly happy with Java. But to those that still hold up CL as a reasonable alternative to Java, my answer is that these things are the tablestakes for even being considered for industrial use.