[slime-devel] slime repl AND slime-fancy vs. XEmacs

Tobias C. Rittweiler tcr at freebits.de
Tue Nov 17 09:00:31 UTC 2009

"Mark H. David" <mhd at yv.org> writes:

> I never really heard of anyone intentionally running SLIME without
> running the REPL.  I thought the REPL was the essence of using SLIME.
> At least, I think it's the most common way people run SLIME.

Even if you do not use the Slime REPL, you'd still have your
implementation's REPL at the *inferior-lisp-buffer*. I guess there are
people who are accustomed to their implementation's powerful repl
(e.g. Allegro users) and really only want to use that.

>  If I'm at all close to right, I would still like to see it there on
> that main installation doc page.  Couldn't it shown as an example
> along with explaining that it's a "contrib", but it's the most
> commonly used one, and then sending them off to the contrib doc for
> extra information?  That's what I'd like to see.

It should say that people typically want to enable the slime-fancy meta
contrib because the default configuation is very minimalistic. (I don't
know what "main installation doc page" refers to. It's the README file?
If not, the README file should be changed, too.)

I'll happily apply a patch from you along Madhu's patch. It's the way to
improve the situation.


More information about the slime-devel mailing list