SwankR and multiple values

[phmarek]

Using swankr to evaluate 1\n2\n3\n results is 3 times (:write-string...) which will result in a REPL output of [1] 1[1] 2[1] 3.

Should swankr ignore intermediate values and only output the last, or should it do a newline inbetween?

[csrhodes]

Good question. How exactly are you evaluating that?

(Sorry for the late response -- Happy New Year!)

[phmarek]

Well, I write the lines

1
2
3

in vim, and then mark and send them to swank:

000040(:emacs-rex (swank:listener-eval "1
2
3
") "R" :repl-thread 10)

I get a result

000024(:write-string "[1] 1" :repl-result)000024(:write-string "[1] 2" :repl-result)000024(:write-string "[1] 3" :repl-result)000015(:return (:ok ()) 10)

The "typical" swank in a CL puts a (progn) around, and so only returns the last result.

The output in the REPL looks like that:

[1] 1[1] 2[1] 3

Oh yes, happy new year to you, too!

[csrhodes]

phmarek notifications@github.com writes:

Well, I write the lines

1
2
3

in vim, and then mark and send them to swank:

000040(:emacs-rex (swank:listener-eval "1

Ah. In the analogous case I would use slime-eval-region, which wouldn't
call listener-eval.

If I absolutely force a listener-eval, by typing
1 C-j 2 C-j 3 RET into my emacs-based slime-repl R buffer, I get 1 2 3
printed back on separate lines (I've got slime-presentations loaded,
which probably enforces that). So I suspect that the right answer is to
mimic that and have newlines between the separate results.

("1 2 3" -- or the same but with newlines -- isn't actually very legal
R; I'm not sure what is actually causing it to be interpreted as three
separate statements, but wrapping it in an implicit progn -- a {} --
would lead to failure to eval).

Cheers,

Christophe

2
3
") "R" :repl-thread 10)

I get a result
```lisp
000024(:write-string "[1] 1" :repl-result)000024(:write-string "[1] 2"
:repl-result)000024(:write-string "[1] 3" :repl-result)000015(:return
(:ok ()) 10)

The "typical" swank in a CL puts a (progn) around, and so only
returns the last result.

The output in the REPL looks like that:

[1] 1[1] 2[1] 3

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#2 (comment)