> When I investigated it, there seemed to be no way to actually connect a repl to a running program.
i (poorly) implemented conditions for racket once, including the ability to drop into a repl at the point of error.
so i think you could put in place some macros that would let you get at a repl wherever you wanted. probably not the sort of thing to leave in place all the time, though
> Unlike with common lisp or clojure, with racket if you make changes to your code you have to restart the REPL, which destroys your state.
that's a different issue. i believe matthias has commented on the mailing list (some years back) that the semantics associated with doing something like that are a mess, and that's why they weren't interested in implementing it.
i (poorly) implemented conditions for racket once, including the ability to drop into a repl at the point of error.
so i think you could put in place some macros that would let you get at a repl wherever you wanted. probably not the sort of thing to leave in place all the time, though
> Unlike with common lisp or clojure, with racket if you make changes to your code you have to restart the REPL, which destroys your state.
that's a different issue. i believe matthias has commented on the mailing list (some years back) that the semantics associated with doing something like that are a mess, and that's why they weren't interested in implementing it.