4 ms·
> get rid of the extra “REPL” panel for good. Why do you need it if you can see your results inline? But I do not want them inline. I want to use the REPL as a
by ReleaseCandidat 5y ago
> get rid of the extra “REPL” panel for good. Why do you need it if you can see your results inline?
But I do not want them inline. I want to use the REPL as a _interactive_ REPL, where I can write my code and later copy that to the file. That's actually one of the reasons I still use Emacs: Common Lisp with Sly and Clojurescript with Cider.
- dunefox 5y agoWhy do you write code in the REPL directly? Write it in a buffer and send it to the REPL.
- GGfpc 5y agoWhy do you want to code in the repl when you can code in the editor and eval in the repl?
- ReleaseCandidat 5y agoBecause I gain nothing when writing in the editor window - because in _Emacs_ the REPL window works (almost) the same as the editor. A REPL with Paredit, autocompletion and 'normal' editing capabilities is what I want. That's why I often program other languages (that have a REPL, but no way to comfortably edit using it, like Haskell, PureScript, Elixir, OCaml und Rust) using Jupyter notebooks, which is the same as evaluating inline - that's better than the 'normal' way (only seeing errors/warnings/... inline) but it's not the same experience.
- coldtea 5y ago>I want to use the REPL as a _interactive_ REPL, where I can write my code and later copy that to the file Just write in the normal editor, and evaluate interactively code from there. Emacs does that too
- ReleaseCandidat 5y agoYes, but I don't have to, because with Emacs I have (almost) the same editing capabilities in the REPL.
- dunefox 5y agoWhy? Then you have to copy it from the REPL into the file later instead of already having a working version in the file. This makes zero sense.