Hmmm... functions as commands at a REPL. Now I feel silly for considering the keyword approach :)
On Dec 11, 5:26 pm, Dan Larkin <d...@danlarkin.org> wrote: > On Dec 11, 2009, at 3:04 PM, Sean Devlin wrote: > > > Wouldn't ::quit do the same thing? > > It wouldn't, because the repl is evaluating in the context of wherever you > put the (debug-repl) call, so its namespace won't be "dr". > > What about instead of using keywords for commands, we use functions for > commands: > > (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 -- 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
