1 (cl:defpackage :sb-aclrepl
2 (:use "COMMON-LISP" "SB-EXT")
3 (:shadowing-import-from "SB-IMPL" "SCRUB-CONTROL-STACK")
4 (:shadowing-import-from "SB-INT" "*REPL-PROMPT-FUN*" "*REPL-READ-FORM-FUN*")
6 ;; user-level customization of UI
7 "*PROMPT*" "*EXIT-ON-EOF*" "*MAX-HISTORY*"
8 "*USE-SHORT-PACKAGE-NAME*" "*COMMAND-CHAR*"
9 ;; user-level customization of functionality
11 ;; internalsish, but the documented way to make a new repl "object"
12 ;; such that it inherits the current state of the repl but has its
13 ;; own independent state subsequently.
16 (cl:in-package :sb-aclrepl)
19 "boolean: T if don't print prompt and output")
20 (defvar *break-level* 0
21 "current break level")
22 (defvar *inspect-break* nil
23 "boolean: T if break caused by inspect")
24 (defvar *continuable-break* nil
25 "boolean: T if break caused by continuable error")
28 (break-level (1+ *break-level*))
32 (let ((*noprint* noprint)
33 (*break-level* break-level)
34 (*inspect-break* inspect)
35 (*continuable-break* continuable))
36 (sb-int:/show0 "entering REPL")
38 (multiple-value-bind (reason reason-param)
43 ;; if we started stepping in the debugger, now is the
45 (sb-impl::disable-stepping))))
46 (declare (ignore reason-param))
48 ((and (eq reason :inspect)
49 (plusp *break-level*))
51 ((and (eq reason :pop)
52 (plusp *break-level*))
53 (return-from repl)))))))
56 "Read-Eval-Print one form"
57 ;; (See comment preceding the definition of SCRUB-CONTROL-STACK.)
60 (funcall *repl-prompt-fun* *standard-output*)
61 ;; (Should *REPL-PROMPT-FUN* be responsible for doing its own
62 ;; FORCE-OUTPUT? I can't imagine a valid reason for it not to
63 ;; be done here, so leaving it up to *REPL-PROMPT-FUN* seems
64 ;; odd. But maybe there *is* a valid reason in some
65 ;; circumstances? perhaps some deadlock issue when being driven
66 ;; by another process or something...)
67 (force-output *standard-output*))
68 (let* ((form (funcall *repl-read-form-fun*
71 (results (multiple-value-list (sb-impl::interactive-eval form))))
73 (dolist (result results)
74 ;; FIXME: Calling fresh-line before a result ensures the result starts
75 ;; on a newline, but it usually generates an empty line.
76 ;; One solution would be to have the newline's entered on the
77 ;; input stream inform the output stream that the column should be
78 ;; reset to the beginning of the line.
79 (fresh-line *standard-output*)
80 (prin1 result *standard-output*)))))