4 ms·
The only time I've ever needed a REPL is if I'm working with a badly architected codebase such that I don't know the shapes of my inputs. It's otherwise pretty
by jimbob45 4y ago
The only time I've ever needed a REPL is if I'm working with a badly architected codebase such that I don't know the shapes of my inputs. It's otherwise pretty easy to reason about well-architected code without needing to run it.
- sli 4y agoA lot of Lisp development is (or can be) REPL-based, Clojure(script) especially, but that's almost a whole paradigm in and of itself.
- wtetzner 4y agoHaving spent a lot of time writing both Clojure and Rust professionally, I think a lot of the benefit you get from a REPL is making up for the lack of a good type system and good IDE support. I also find that the support Rust has for unit tests partially makes up for the lack of a REPL. Clojure has a bunch of other benefits over Rust when it comes to quick prototyping though.
- anon291 4y agoIn Haskell, you always know the shape of the input, so this completely misses the point of what the commenter above is trying to say.
- GoblinSlayer 4y agoFor me the most interesting and non-obvious property of the code is how the whole thing interacts in the long run, but you can't possibly figure that out with REPL as preparation of inputs would be immense.