namespacing symbols seems sufficient, indeed. 2009/12/11 Stephen C. Gilardi <squee...@mac.com>
> > On Dec 11, 2009, at 5:08 AM, Laurent PETIT wrote: > > But then, we could even go one level deeper: not only provide a particular > instance that would allow to quit the REPL, but a set of instances. And if > the returned value of the call to the REPL returns one of the instances in > the set, then quit. > This would allow to nest debug-repls (but is it interesting ?) calls, and > to go back to the encapsulating repl by e.g. a call to debug-repl/quit(1), > or to go up 2 levels in the debug-repls nesting by calling > debug-repl/quit(2), ... or to go back to the main environment by e.g. a call > to debug-repl/quit(). > > > One possible implementation of this is to use keywords as commands to the > debug-repl. Since evaluating a keyword (alone on a line by itself) is seldom > interesting, we could use ones like :quit or :pop as commands intercepted by > the debug repl before evaluation. We could even respond to a set of commands > and send any unrecognized commands along to the evaluator. > > If hijacking namespace-less keywords for that purpose is distasteful, we > could also put the commands in a namespace, for example: > > :dr/quit > > --Steve > > -- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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
