| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
It's the convention and by following it we make a big step towards
supporting outline navigation.
The convention doesn't say much about what parts of the code are
supposed to be part of that sections and what parts belong in a
subsequent section. Here we put the `require' forms in this section
and maybe some setup code, that's a popular approach.
In most cases there was " " where we now insert "Code:". They both
serve a similar purpose and we keep the former because some users
depend on that for navigation. We even add this " " in libraries
where it previously was missing.
In some cases the permission statement was followed by a commentary,
which obviously does not belong in the "Code:" section. In such cases
add the conventional "Commentary:" section.
|
|
It's the convention and by following it we make a big step towards
supporting outline navigation.
|
|
Okay, i must confess it's sometimes handy to restart the REPL before
compiling a file (the proverbial clean slate and all). And we already
have geiser-restart-repl, so combining the two things when C-u happens
was not really difficult.
|
|
We were expanding the path of files to be loaded at the wrong place in
the wrong way. This should be better and address bug #196.
|
|
Let's see if i finally got this right...
|
|
|
|
|
|
As per Andy's request. Adding it to Racket (and to the user manual),
shouldn't be difficult).
|
|
We cannot consistently maintain a local cache, because of
re-evaluations of external symbols will go unnoticed. The new strategy
(remembering only the latest signatures) mostly works, although it
introduces a bit of extra flickering every now and then.
A global cache is perhaps worth considering.
|
|
|
|
This allows the implementation decide the concrete structure of the
code sent to the REPL. For instance, it doesn't need to be a single
s-expression, and argument order can be re-arranged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
