The more REPL friendly languages (Common Lisp e.g.) provide a way to switch the namespace that the interpreter is in at any time. That way the package/module system no longer hinders REPL.
On Friday, October 5, 2012 9:07:20 AM UTC-7, F.S. wrote: > > On Friday, October 5, 2012 5:35:47 AM UTC-7, Edward K. Ream wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 5:06 PM, F.S. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > What I was referring to was that when we eval everything at the top >> level of course we break all the module restrictions. >> >> I have no idea what you are worried about. >> > > Let's say we are working on a class/function that we are changing > frequently and we don't want to restart every time. If we put our function > in a module, in order to redefine it we can reload the whole module. But we > want to be careful so that reloading the module doesn't create unwanted > side effect. If that is impossible we need to just redefine the function > without reloading the whole module. We probably need to do something like > this: first define the function in top level, then rebind the > module.function_name to the new definition at the top level. This is only > possible if we have been very careful about scoping rules so that non-local > symbols (global vars, imported names) referred to in the function body are > always resolved consistently. The module system could interfere with REPL > flow. I prefer the Lisp way of long meaningful symbol names instead of > relying on the module system to keep namespaces separate. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/leo-editor/-/9taos5SoXhEJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en.
