Re: Rename `eww' to `web'

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>         [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider
>         [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,
>         [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example.
>
>     It's not the same kind of interaction.  ielm simulates an "interactive"
>     REPL, like other lisps or shells.
>
> That doesn't enlighten me -- I would say *scratch*, using C-j to end
> an expression, is "interactive".
>
> Evaluation with C-j does not display the character equivalent
> of a number.
>
> The only two differences I see in ielm are (1) use of RET instead of
> C-j, and (2) a prompt.

Yes, and the order in which the different parts are inserted, when using
C-p C-e or M-p:

     M-x ielm RET (defvar *i*) RET (setq *i* 0) RET (list (+ 1 2) (setq
     *i* (+ 1 *i*))) RET M-p RET 

results in:

    ELISP> (defvar *i*)
    *i*
    ELISP> (setq *i* 0)
    0
    ELISP> (list (+ 1 2) (setq  *i* (+ 1 *i*)))
    (3 1)

    ELISP> (list (+ 1 2) (setq  *i* (+ 1 *i*)))
    (3 2)

    ELISP> 

vs.

     C-x b *scratch* RET (defvar *i*) C-j (setq *i* 0) C-j (list (+ 1 2) (setq
     *i* (+ 1 *i*))) C-j C-p C-e C-j

results in:

    (defvar *i*)
    *i*
    (setq *i* 0)
    0
    (list (+ 1 2)  (setq *i* (+ 1 *i*)))
    (3 2)

    (3 1)

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.  
You know you've been lisping too long when you see a recent picture of George 
Lucas and think "Wait, I thought John McCarthy was dead!" -- Dalek_Baldwin