|
|
|
|
|
by barrkel
1339 days ago
|
|
Well, there you go. Jupyter isn't very much like binding.pry, because it lacks the debugger-ness. REPLs without the debugger bit aren't nearly as good. That's why I mentioned debugger for JS and binding.pry (implicitly, for Ruby). binding.pry pops you into a terminal REPL with the local binding in scope, just like the eval function of your debugger; except you can start writing loops, define new variables, and more rarely, new functions, right there. When writing code with a test-first model, you set up the data fixture then pop a binding.pry in the implementation, right where you expect to start implementing it, and run the test. You can then implement the logic in the middle of the test execution - in the middle of your debugger session - and because the REPL is so expressive, you can do a lot. You then copy & paste out those lines and save them in the implementation logic, and shuffle the binding.pry on to the next spot. Or in a hobby project, you can fly by the seat of your pants, and write code live on the server. There's a remote version of Pry if multiple workers sharing a terminal start fighting each other to own keystrokes. |
|