4 ms·
I've noticed quite a few Smalltalk programmers who actually coded in the debugger. They would put a call in the program, hit it as an error, and then write new
by protomyth 6y ago
I've noticed quite a few Smalltalk programmers who actually coded in the debugger. They would put a call in the program, hit it as an error, and then write new code. Does this happen with Common Lisp programmers?
- phoe-krk 6y agoSmalltalk and Common Lisp are both image-based programming languages where the compiler and debugger are always available. I think debugger-oriented programming is much more common in Smalltalk than in Lisp (at least I prefer to leave the debugger back to REPL pretty often), but I think it's certainly possible to adopt. The Slime/Sly environments for emacs might accept a few patches to facilitate that programming style better.
- p_l 6y agoI know of several lispers that swear by top-down "programming inside debugger", where they continuously fill in the gaps starting from top level function :-D
- phoe-krk 6y agoDo you have any videos of such programming style performed in Lisp, or could you try to convince some of those programmers to record some of their programming sessions?
- rags2riches 6y agoYou could look up Baggers on Youtube for plenty of fun Lisp coding sessions.
- phoe-krk 6y agoI know Baggers and his videos but I wasn't aware that he does debugger-oriented programming. Thanks, I'll pay closer attention to them!