|
|
|
|
|
|
by massysett
756 days ago
|
|
|
The author of “Let Over Lambda” dislikes Emacs and does not use it. What’s more, he didn’t use Slimv or anything like it or even Vim at all. He used a more basic vi, maybe nvi. So perhaps the interactive experience is not essential. You can just edit and compile like you would in C. That’s not what I do—-I use Slime—but it is possible. Also, a lot of the interactivity is required by the standard to be built in to your Lisp’s REPL, so you can do quite a bit if your REPL isn’t primitive. SBCL doesn’t even have readline but you can use rlwrap. https://letoverlambda.com/ |
|
|
I have no idea what Hoyte like to type in, but why does it matter what text editor he uses? Einstein didn't had any computer, not even a calculator. Do we have to use paper and pencil for all the calculations just because Einstein did? Our physics teacher in gymnasium, forced us for 4 years to do all calculations on tests by hand, at four decimal places, with that exact excuse: Einstein didn't have a mini calc. Non of us have become a Nobel prize taker in physics :).
> Also, a lot of the interactivity is required by the standard to be built in to your Lisp’s REPL, so you can do quite a bit if your REPL isn’t primitive.
Mnjah; not so much really. Using at least SBCL from plain command line really sucks. If you mistype something you have to retype everything, no history, etc.
> SBCL doesn’t even have readline
If you are on some *nix OS, you can get a long way by just using SBCL with built-in sb-aclrepl + linedit. Aclrepl gives you "command-like" stuff, similar to ":" in Vi (or M-x in Emacs), and linedit adds cursor motion, history and some basic completion. I would still not type entire programs in repl, but for running and testing the code it is a basic survival kit. For me personally it is enough.
There is also cl-repl package which gives you native bindings and some extras if you want to go all-in readline from within the lisp itself.