But then you have to re-evaluate it every time you press Run... I had forgotten about the fact that the require could have an error, which clearly makes this impossible in the general case. I guess what I'd like is a "sticky" require that gets loaded into the REPL each time I hit run, even if there's a compile-time error in the Defs. What I've taken to telling students to do is to open a new tab and experiment in there when they're having trouble figuring out what's wrong with their code.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > Why don't you evaluate the require in the REPL directly? > (The error could be in a require line, so there is no way > of saying 'load this even if hell breaks loose'). > > > On Nov 14, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Todd O'Bryan wrote: > >> One thing that annoys me about DrRacket is that, if you have an error >> in the Definitions pane, none of your required modules are loaded, so >> if you try to fiddle in the Interactions window, you get "undefined" >> errors. It may be that (require ...) can appear pretty much anywhere, >> so I don't know if it's reasonable to try to read in the require specs >> from the top of the Definitions file, but some way to say, "Here are >> the things I need in the Interactions, even if my Definitions fail" >> would be nice. >> >> Todd >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
