Some progress on this has already been made, which is how it got as close
to standalone as it is now -- previously the REPL was more NQP than Rakudo.
Do you have something specific in mind?

One of my dreams is to adopt a client/server + middleware model from nREPL
(clojure) which I think works really well, and likely to do that in
userspace as a regular module. Moving everything into (perl6
instead of nqp) lets us use de-facto interfaces and easily override it in a
user module.


On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Parrot Raiser <> wrote:

> I was not proposing that the REPL was to be invoked in any other way
> than at present. By "reducing the coupling", I mean arranging
> functions and interfaces in a way that prevents a change in one
> function affecting the other. Essentially, implementing standard
> interfaces between complete functions.
> A REPL has multiple parts; a code editing function, the UI to manage
> that, an execution environment, and the language being executed. The
> interfaces between them should be such that any one of them can be
> extended and improved without having an impact on the others.
> Minimising coupling is a fundamental design requirement for easy
> development and maintenance of a complex system. For example, new
> functions in the language shouldn't need changes to the editor.
> On 5/30/17, Richard Hainsworth <> wrote:
> >   Please do not weaken the link between REPL and perl6 !
> >
> > The ability to test perl6 snippets very quickly is something I find very
> > useful. And to get this I type 'perl6'. Easy to remember.
> >
> > (I have been following perl6 since the very beginning, and installed
> > 'pug'. Since perl6 has been evolving, I always check syntax with REPL
> > first. Without it I would be lost as I still find sequences, arrays,
> > .slip, .flat, '|' etc incredibly difficult to master.)
> >
> > 'rakudo' is not perl6, but an implementation of perl6. Even so, it is
> > called using 'perl6 [options] <program name>'.
> >
> > To insist, for the sake of purity, that REPL is called by some other
> > name than 'perl6' would require for the sake of purity that 'rakudo' is
> > called using the command 'rakudo' and not 'perl6'. If a computer guru
> > wants to do that on a system that he/she controls, what is stopping them?
> >
> > However, I would argue it is best, at present and in order to facilitate
> > adoption of perl6, that we keep to the current naming scheme and make it
> > easy for newcomers to perl6.
> >
> > Finanalyst
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:34 AM, Parrot Raiser wrote:
> >> The REPL's almost an independent project.
> >>
> >> Can it be made modular, to reduce the coupling between it and the
> >> language?
> >

Reply via email to