Thomas F. Burdick wrote:
Edi Weitz writes:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 04:27:00 +0200, hww hww@inbox.ru wrote:
This is bad. What is the problem with file without definition?
A file without function definitions is not a program, that's very simple.
Well, kind of. The toplevel is good for interactively poking at things, but it can also be nice to do that in a buffer.
Absolutely true! This is similar MEL in Maya. Just make sequense execute it. Then it can be used as source. Some kind of interactivity.
That said, I don't get hww's question. If you have a buffer full of disembodied forms you want to evaluate, point to them and say "eval this", aka C-M-x. Don't just write scripts. If you do things that way, it has the advantage that you *know* where the error was, you're pointing at it.
So My friend shown me that the problem was that C-c C-c does not shows error message when I did it first time in session. After fisrt C-c C-c (for nothing) all begin works OK And all another C-c C-c shows error message, and underline all errors.
I got that while compiler shows error, it does not create somthing. And that is why when I start function and it shows error I can't jump from (foo) frame.
But, this is not problem cause compiler should show message and error should be corrected.
My friend show me another example
(defun foo(a) (/ 2 a) )
(foo 0)
Which compiled without errors but still has this error. And when program breaks here. 'v' (even as M-p/M-n) from frame (foo 0) jumps to source wery well. :)
I can claim that SLIME works (with some but) but I can't be aggree friends, that SLIME+EMACS is easy to use IDE. Sorry. :)
But I can be aggree that it is besta what I saw for Lisp.