Some progress on this has already been made, which is how it got as close to standalone as it is now -- previously the REPL was more NQP than Rakudo. Do you have something specific in mind?
One of my dreams is to adopt a client/server + middleware model from nREPL (clojure) which I think works really well, and likely to do that in userspace as a regular module. Moving everything into REPL.pm (perl6 instead of nqp) lets us use de-facto interfaces and easily override it in a user module. --Brock On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I was not proposing that the REPL was to be invoked in any other way > than at present. By "reducing the coupling", I mean arranging > functions and interfaces in a way that prevents a change in one > function affecting the other. Essentially, implementing standard > interfaces between complete functions. > > A REPL has multiple parts; a code editing function, the UI to manage > that, an execution environment, and the language being executed. The > interfaces between them should be such that any one of them can be > extended and improved without having an impact on the others. > Minimising coupling is a fundamental design requirement for easy > development and maintenance of a complex system. For example, new > functions in the language shouldn't need changes to the editor. > > On 5/30/17, Richard Hainsworth <rnhainswo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Please do not weaken the link between REPL and perl6 ! > > > > The ability to test perl6 snippets very quickly is something I find very > > useful. And to get this I type 'perl6'. Easy to remember. > > > > (I have been following perl6 since the very beginning, and installed > > 'pug'. Since perl6 has been evolving, I always check syntax with REPL > > first. Without it I would be lost as I still find sequences, arrays, > > .slip, .flat, '|' etc incredibly difficult to master.) > > > > 'rakudo' is not perl6, but an implementation of perl6. Even so, it is > > called using 'perl6 [options] <program name>'. > > > > To insist, for the sake of purity, that REPL is called by some other > > name than 'perl6' would require for the sake of purity that 'rakudo' is > > called using the command 'rakudo' and not 'perl6'. If a computer guru > > wants to do that on a system that he/she controls, what is stopping them? > > > > However, I would argue it is best, at present and in order to facilitate > > adoption of perl6, that we keep to the current naming scheme and make it > > easy for newcomers to perl6. > > > > Finanalyst > > > > > > On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:34 AM, Parrot Raiser wrote: > >> The REPL's almost an independent project. > >> > >> Can it be made modular, to reduce the coupling between it and the > >> language? > > >
