Hello, While I understand this solution has been long in place for Lips, I don't think it looks like the ideal solution, e.g. in a world where the "source code" is still in files, and not managed by the "lisp image". I'm aware of just smalltalk that does this cleanly (it is even managing versions of modifications as they are made !).
This to say, that, as an IDE provider, I feel uneasy to offer text source code in an editor, while not being able to say to the user : "what you are currently seeing is/is not in sync with what is in the running lisp you see in the REPL below". How does Slime handle that ? Thanks in advance for your answers, (I'm not an experience emacs/slime user, so feedback welcome !) -- Laurent On 16 jan, 19:31, Allen Rohner <aroh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 16, 9:32 am, Peter Wolf <opus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello, and thanks for all the help with the IntelliJ plugin. > > > The next feature I want to implement is "references". That is, one > > selects a symbol, and then can go to the location where that symbol was > > defined (e.g. def, defn, let, etc.). One can also get a list of all the > > locations where that symbol is referenced. This feature is very nice > > for navigating code, and is also the core of many automatic refactorings > > (e.g. "rename"). > > > Implementing references are pretty straightforward in a static language > > like Java, were all the references are resolved at compile time. > > However, in a language like Clojure some references get resolved at run > > time. > > > How do other IDEs handle this? Is there a recommended set of rules for > > what references can and can not be resolved by the editor? How does one > > detect a possible non-static reference, or how does one ensure that a > > reference will always refer to the same location? > > > Note that I need a 100% reliable solution, if I am going to implement > > automatic refactoring on top of it. No one wants refactoring that > > messes up the code 5% of the time. > > > Thanks > > Peter > > I haven't been following the IntelliJ plugin. Does it use slime? SLIME > + Lisp has had a solution for this for years by directly asking the > running lisp process. The high level description is that the process > keeps track of all of the functions it has loaded/compiled, and the > list of functions each of those functions calls. Then to find out who > calls foo, you just ask the process. The answer is pretty reliable and > doesn't require writing your own parser. Of course, it too can't deal > with eval'ing and identifiers in XML, but I'm not sure that anything > can. > > I've been toying with the idea of implementing this in clojure. > > Allen > > It would be fairly straightforward to modify the running clojure --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
