> REPL provides much more value with a dynamic language vs a static language One of the reasons why CL is how it is, is to support incremental & interactive pr

> REPL provides much more value with a dynamic language vs a static language One of the reasons why CL is how it is, is to support incremental & interactive programming. That was a big driver for its language design. Being able to work on programs of arbitrary size while they are running. For that CL is a dynamic language. Not just a dynamically typed language. 'Dynamic language' means that one can change the program AND the programming language while the code is running. For that Common Lisp does a lot of runtime checks and includes an error system which enables one to repair code while in an error -> in Common Lisp the debugger stays in the context of the error and one may have explicit ways to restart the program. One can use that also programmatically. Something like a REPL is not just there because you need to test your code to make it run, it is there because it enables us to program AND test a running program without crashing it.