[racket] Feature request: requires make it into Interactions even if Definitions have an error

But then you have to re-evaluate it every time you press Run...

I had forgotten about the fact that the require could have an error,
which clearly makes this impossible in the general case. I guess what
I'd like is a "sticky" require that gets loaded into the REPL each
time I hit run, even if there's a compile-time error in the Defs. What
I've taken to telling students to do is to open a new tab and
experiment in there when they're having trouble figuring out what's
wrong with their code.

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Matthias Felleisen
<matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>
> Why don't you evaluate the require in the REPL directly?
> (The error could be in a require line, so there is no way
> of saying 'load this even if hell breaks loose').
>
>
> On Nov 14, 2011, at 3:12 PM, Todd O'Bryan wrote:
>
>> One thing that annoys me about DrRacket is that, if you have an error
>> in the Definitions pane, none of your required modules are loaded, so
>> if you try to fiddle in the Interactions window, you get "undefined"
>> errors. It may be that (require ...) can appear pretty much anywhere,
>> so I don't know if it's reasonable to try to read in the require specs
>> from the top of the Definitions file, but some way to say, "Here are
>> the things I need in the Interactions, even if my Definitions fail"
>> would be nice.
>>
>> Todd
>> _________________________________________________
>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
>
>