5 ms·
Exactly. It ties to the excessive startup overhead. If you rename things and change stuff you must run the tests in a fresh JVM to ensure that everything has be
by mjul 4y ago
Exactly. It ties to the excessive startup overhead. If you rename things and change stuff you must run the tests in a fresh JVM to ensure that everything has been evaluated in a consistent state rather ad hoc evaluation in the REPL. This means running from the command line in addition to your REPL or restarting the REPL regularly.
- frou_dh 4y agoI don't know - the kind of programmer who's always worried about every what-if probably shouldn't choose any dynamic interactive language in the first place. There are plenty of language permutations out there for all sensibilities.
- synthc 4y agoBut programmers should be worried about every what-if scenario, regardless of language.
- funstuff007 4y ago> worried about every what-if I hear you about this, but during prototyping one cannot be excessively concerned with did I change the global state enough such that it's better to just start a new REPL (and have to worry about the associated costs)? And if you ask this question a lot, long running REPLs are not a good idea for development.
- synthc 4y agofor prototyping a long running repl is fine. For validation/testing starting with a clean slate takes away a lot of my worries.
- CraigJPerry 4y agoThere’s a tool called Clerk which among other things resolves this concern about out of sync definitions https://github.com/nextjournal/clerk https://github.com/nextjournal/clerk