References to "REPL" from past

[Jean Louis]

* Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> [2020-11-01 00:27]:
> [[[ 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. ]]]
> 
> I wrote
> 
>     > The term "REPL" is inapplicable for most of these languages, since
>     > they do not have anything comparable ton read, eval, or print.
> 
> You responded,
> 
>   > It's useless to fight to reserve this term to Lisp: it has been solidly 
>   > coined for similar programs in non-homoiconic languages as well for the 
>   > last 10-20 years at least.
> 
> which seems to be a change of subject, because you're talking about
> some sort of "fight".
> 
> I'm talking about the question of what terminology we should use in
> describing and designing GNU Emacs.  We should use clear and correct
> terminology.
> 
> Doing that does not require that we fight with other groups
> that make other decisions.
> 
>   > The languages in question might not have the same kind of 'read', but 
>   > they usually have 'eval', and their REPLs do 'print'.
> 
> 'read' and 'eval' are things that those lanuages don't have.  Their
> command loops do have the ability to read and execute an expression,
> but that does not break down, in those languages, into a combination
> of 'read' and 'eval' in the Lisp sense.

See references here:
https://code.i-harness.com/en/q/baf810 - use eww for those not using Javascript

as the above link is research on Python's "REPL" in response to RMS on
previous discussions

As the times pass people dillute or divert some definitions, take it
out of the context and today even HTML has REPL:
https://repl.it/languages/html (does not work without Javascript)