rlwrap VS timbre

Possibly more universal, but there are also tools like rlwrap [1] that adds readline support to programs that don't have it. From the docs apparently the readline library ships a similar tool ootb nowadays but I haven't tried that and just noticed now when I wanted to share the rlwrap link.

[1] https://github.com/hanslub42/rlwrap

Otherwise I use rlwrap, which is a general purpose readline wrapper: https://github.com/hanslub42/rlwrap It's pretty basic stuff, but makes basic line editing less painful, & adds history support.

Friends if you dont know: you can add readline support to LOTS of things, especially custom scripts and tools with a prompt by just calling the program with rlwrap.

> rlwrap is a 'readline wrapper', a small utility that uses the GNU Readline library to allow the editing of keyboard input for any command.

https://github.com/hanslub42/rlwrap

rlwrap for any interactive command will give it a history. You can even build a file to have tab completion. https://github.com/hanslub42/rlwrap

rlwrap is a 'readline wrapper', a small utility that uses the GNU Readline library to allow the editing of keyboard input for any command, something that tclsh, wish and sbcl don't provide.

This can be as easy as wrapping a simple stdin/stdout loop with rlwrap, all the way to using full featured TUI libraries like bubbletea (golang), textual (python) or imtui (c++).

You could always use rlwrap (installable via homebrew). You would launch R with rlwrap R in that case. However, I suspect there is something else missing, because it appears that the R repl usually includes readline support. Thus my questions about installation method and OS.

As you can see ,clj, behind the scenes, wraps a call to $bin_dir/clojure with the rlwrap tool. rlwrap provides a better command-line editing experience.

If read-line functionality is missing from languages that provide repls or command line interpreters, rlwrap has always served me well on linux. Many distros provide their own package too.

There are logging libraries that include syntactically scoped timers, such as mulog (https://github.com/BrunoBonacci/mulog). While a great library, we preferred timbre (https://github.com/taoensso/timbre) and rolled our own logging timer macro that interoperates with it. More convenient to have such niceties in a Lisp of course.

Mentioning μ/log and no mention of timbre (https://github.com/taoensso/timbre), that is an odd omission. Malli is a great mention, but there ought to be a mention of clojure.spec (https://github.com/clojure/spec.alpha) which has much more mindshare.

If you're not familiar with lisps in general, it might be hard to grok the differences between lisp-macros (as used in Clojure) and "normal" macros you see in other languages.

But, if you are familiar already, and just wanna see examples of neat macros that makes the API nicer than what a function could provide, here are a few:

- https://github.com/clojure/core.async/blob/master/examples/w...

- https://github.com/weavejester/compojure

- https://github.com/ptaoussanis/timbre

- https://github.com/krisajenkins/yesql

When clj is invoked, two libraries will be available in our code: timbre logging library which artifacts taken from Maven, and test-runner, taken from GitHub.

No, I don't think they were hyped at any point.

They are used in certain libraries like https://github.com/ptaoussanis/timbre but for things that are simply not possible without macros, for example (timbre/spy (+ 1 1)) will actually print both the expression and the result:

DEBUG [ss.experimental.scratch:1] - (+ 1 1) => 2

Perhaps if the macros are "simple" they can be unpacked relatively easily. I do understand how mentally challenging that can be for somebody who's just starting with Clojure. I've been using Clojure for ~8 years and only just recently became more comfortable with macros after I made a conscious effort in that direction. I'm still far from an "expert" in them.