Better REPL for SBCL?

From: Moritz Ulrich
Subject: Better REPL for SBCL?
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 15:13:59 +0000
Message-ID: <gdcufn$m2a$03$1@news.t-online.com>

Hello,

I'm using clisp under Mac OS X 10.5 at the moment, but I want to try 
other implementations.  My favorite so far is SBCL, but I miss the REPL 
of clisp. There is no <Tab>-Completion or command history. (Or I just 
can't find it).

Can anyone give me a few pointers where to look?

Re: Better REPL for SBCL? Nikodemus Siivola
Re: Better REPL for SBCL? Brian
- Re: Better REPL for SBCL? MasterZiv
Re: Better REPL for SBCL? Alex Mizrahi
Re: Better REPL for SBCL? ·······@eurogaran.com

From: Nikodemus Siivola
Subject: Re: Better REPL for SBCL?
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:56:52 +0000
Message-ID: <d9816672-d772-4ed4-8242-30e680bcd783@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>

On Oct 18, 6:13 pm, Moritz Ulrich <···········@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm using clisp under Mac OS X 10.5 at the moment, but I want to try
> other implementations.  My favorite so far is SBCL, but I miss the REPL
> of clisp. There is no <Tab>-Completion or command history. (Or I just
> can't find it).
>
> Can anyone give me a few pointers where to look?

I second the Slime recommendation. Strongly.

However, if you really want to use a bare command-line, have a look at
linedit

  http://common-lisp.net/project/linedit/

and rlwrap

  http://utopia.knoware.nl/~hlub/rlwrap/man.html

Cheers,

 -- Nikodemus

From: Brian
Subject: Re: Better REPL for SBCL?
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 17:26:53 +0000
Message-ID: <47965b1a-f7e7-45ec-826f-18e6f612a1f0@p49g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>

Moritz Ulrich wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm using clisp under Mac OS X 10.5 at the moment, but I want to try
> other implementations.  My favorite so far is SBCL, but I miss the REPL
> of clisp. There is no <Tab>-Completion or command history. (Or I just
> can't find it).
>
> Can anyone give me a few pointers where to look?
SBCL also comes with sb-aclrepl, which might be slightly better.

Try using rlwrap with SBCL; it also makes it nicer to use.

From: MasterZiv
Subject: Re: Better REPL for SBCL?
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 12:54:27 +0000
Message-ID: <0fea3ec1-ed7a-4aad-b0a0-6772162ea8a0@v28g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>

On Oct 18, 9:26 pm, Brian <··············@gmail.com> wrote:

> SBCL also comes with sb-aclrepl, which might be slightly better.
>
> Try using rlwrap with SBCL; it also makes it nicer to use.

You can also add `rlwrap' around SBCL, but this is the best you can
have without
SLIME & EMACS. SBCL is not very interactive thing in this respect.

From: Alex Mizrahi
Subject: Re: Better REPL for SBCL?
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 15:21:49 +0000
Message-ID: <48f9ff15$0$90276$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>

 MU> Can anyone give me a few pointers where to look?

Emacs/SLIME sort of provides consistent REPL accross different 
implementations..

From: ·······@eurogaran.com
Subject: Re: Better REPL for SBCL?
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:09:44 +0000
Message-ID: <e0eefdff-fb7b-40c3-a61e-93aeb314ae91@75g2000hso.googlegroups.com>

CLISP uses the libreadline library, which was made for bash and
consequently receives a lot of attention from developers.
SBCL supposes you are using it mostly from Emacs, so you don't need
the features of the readline library.
I myself use emacs' inferior-mode-lisp with ILISP, which pretty much
blurs the distinction among implementations in this respect.