[Larceny-users] incremental development in ERR5RS/larceny

[Jose A. Ortega Ruiz]

William D Clinger <will at ccs.neu.edu> writes:


[...]

>> So, if i'm getting this right, the closer i can get in Larceny to my
>> ideal world is re-compiling and re-loading the library at hand (and all
>> the libraries that import it) everytime i modify any form in its body or
>> import/export specifications.
>
> Right.  In native Larceny, you wouldn't have to compile the
> changed library, because native Larceny compiles everything
> it loads.
>
> Note, however, that re-importing the library won't do anything,
> because libraries are imported only once.  You really would have
> to call the ERR5RS load procedure (which you can import from the
> (larceny load) or (err5rs load) libraries) to load the library
> after making the change.
>
> And then you'd still have to import the library again to make
> the loaded library replace its original version in your REPL,
> and you have to re-load (not re-import) all libraries that
> depend on the changed library as well.

I see... it's almost as if i were implementing DrScheme's model with its
'Run' button restarting the interpreter after each change. Which might
be the right thing to do, after all.

Does it happen to be a way of asking Larceny for a list of loaded
libraries as well as their import lists?

>> And it actually makes no sense to think
>> about evaluating expressions in a library's namespace (as you would do
>> for instance in s48 with ,in, or in CL after an in-package form).
>
> It might make sense, but there would be a lot of questions
> about its semantics, and there is no provision for it in the
> R6RS, in ERR5RS, or in Larceny.

Understood. In my opinion, it'd be very nice if future revisions of the
Report brought Scheme closer to the CL/Smalltalk model, in which you
work most of the time inside a living program, continuosly morphing it
into completion. I'm a bit surprised about what i perceive as a gulf
separating CL and Scheme in this regard, specially with the advent of
R6RS; but i've been interested in Lisp only for a few years and maybe
it's a misconception due to lack of perspective on my side.

Cheers,
jao