Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Julieta Shem Newsgroups: sci.lang,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme Subject: Re: REPL in Lisp Followup-To: comp.lang.lisp Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 18:12:48 -0300 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 57 Message-ID: <875xta5n73.fsf@yaxenu.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 23:12:57 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="14be15ed003b2981bb013f9e91bc5bd2"; logging-data="3363925"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ohu0KcFc6GpjML9fs7z+Q/FY1fEAv6Uk=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:CmIxvfwImkRZtJQyzTZXoBJwlOw= sha1:Gc8nwoYJZcgbPrxCHEY3K5SV4gE= Bytes: 3635 Follow-up to comp.lang.lisp. Even though it doesn't even belong to comp.lang.lisp, let's at least free other groups from this topic. Or provide me with better judgement. Lawrence D'Oliveiro writes: > On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 12:57:12 -0000 (UTC), Antonio Marques wrote: > >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 19:11:17 -0700, HenHanna wrote: >>> >>>> the acronym (?) REPL must be new in Lisp (and Scheme) >>>> >>>> i'm sure i never saw it (used or mentioned) 25 years ago. >>> >>> There are many new terms coined for old concepts. Like “capture” for >>> “lexical binding”, or “dependency injection” for “callback”. >>> >> I can more or less see how callbacks can be used as a kind of dependency >> injection, but those are separate concepts. > > “Dependency injection” is just packaging up a bunch of callbacks as > methods in a class. Why would you say ``packaging up''? Can we look at Wikipedia? (I'd appreciate a good reference. I don't know exactly where to look.) --8<-------------------------------------------------------->8--- [...] dependency injection is a programming technique in which an object or function receives other objects or functions that it requires, as opposed to creating them internally. Dependency injection aims to separate the concerns of constructing objects and using them, leading to loosely coupled programs.[1][2][3] The pattern ensures that an object or function that wants to use a given service should not have to know how to construct those services. Instead, the receiving 'client' (object or function) is provided with its dependencies by external code (an 'injector'), which it is not aware of. --Wikipedia --8<-------------------------------------------------------->8--- So I see why you're saying ``callback'' because the object or function will call your procedures to get what it needs (instead of creating them internally). But why would say ``packaging up''? (Couldn't I ``inject'' the ``dependencies'' by passing them all as arguments.) I suppose ``packaging up'' would be appropriate if we pass in to a procedure an object containing all the callbacks that you say. Anyway, my interpretation of the Wikipedia article is merely abstraction. Nothing but abstraction. I don't see why we need to call it ``injection'' or even ``dependency'', even though the choice of words isn't absurd. (*) The source Dependency injection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_injection