Re: Why does the SBCL REPL suck so bad?
- From: "Thomas F. Burdick" <tburdick@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 10:02:30 -0000
On Aug 4, 8:25 pm, "Erik R." <rasmussene...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm new to lisp and just starting my first program. I must state
upfront that I can't stand emacs. That might be blasphemous in this
newsgroup, but I'm sorry...I just don't like it at all. I've got
Eclipse and CUSP (attaching to SBCL) set up and it seems to be a
pretty good lisp IDE so far. The only problem is that in-package
doesn't work in the CUSP REPL, so I've just run SBCL directly and have
loaded my project and am testing my functions as I write them.
But what's killing me is the extreme unusability of the SBCL REPL.
If you insist on using tools in a way that no one else uses them,
don't expect them to be easy to use. AFAIK, people who actually use
Lisp to get work done do not use Eclipse, so you shouldn't expect it
to be especially usable. If you run SBCL under Emacs like most of the
world, or use McClim like a few brave/foolish souls, you should have a
much more usable environment.
No one's saying you have to use Emacs for anything else, but yes, use
it for Lisp. CUA-mode (M-x cua-mode <RET>) will make it behave like a
half-way reasonable application on Linux and Windows. Use Aquamacs on
the Mac. Or use viper, if you're a vi user.
.
- References:
- Why does the SBCL REPL suck so bad?
- From: Erik R.
- Why does the SBCL REPL suck so bad?
- Prev by Date: Re: Postmodern ?
- Next by Date: Re: My First Lisp...(update)
- Previous by thread: Re: Why does the SBCL REPL suck so bad?
- Next by thread: Re: Why does the SBCL REPL suck so bad?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|