3 ms·

Racket has mediocre interactive features or so I hear: https://gist.github.com/vindarel/c1ef5e043773921e3b11d8f4fe1ca7ac https://gist.github.com/vindarel/c1ef5e

Racket has mediocre interactive features or so I hear: https://gist.github.com/vindarel/c1ef5e043773921e3b11d8f4fe1ca7ac https://gist.github.com/vindarel/c1ef5e043773921e3b11d8f4fe1... > no condition/restart but just print you a trace, and little runtime inspector/debugger support CL really was built with interactive support from the ground up. I don't think Janet has many?

schemescape 3y ago
I'm curiuos about the interactivity of Janet as well. I saw that someone added support for opting into a level of indirection for resolving symbols, which would theoretically support re-defining functions interactively. There also appears to be Conjure support for editor integration. In my case, I wasn't convinced Janet would support REPL-driven programming like Common Lisp, so I decided to try CL first. I very much like the concept of Janet (a Lua-sized Lisp), but I couldn't identify a compelling reason to choose Janet over CL in my case (just some hobby projects).
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  Janet has the pieces for this in the spork stdlib with netrepl combined with fibers, but there's no standard or pre-configured way to set it up. Its current approach to namespaces doesn't particularly allow for it either, so you have to choose one of a few various hacks for redefining things as you noticed. People have been asking for it and demonstrating proofs of concepts for the last year or so so it wouldn't surprise me to see it formally addressed soon. But I don't know, I don't have any particularly insight I just like that language and keep half an eye on it.