Language Ideas

do you guys ever have ideas for features in programming languages that you have never seen implemented but would like to?
i'm sure some of you have. i can't be the only one.
share them here.
i'll start with an idea i had a little while ago; i wouldn't be surprised if some language such as perl had already thought of it though.

have you ever been stuck writing long if statements along the lines of: if(c == x || c == y || c == z)?
sure, it might not look so bad in this case since it's rather short. but what if you could abbreviate it?
something like: if(c == ||(x,y,z)), or perhaps if(c == (x || y || z)), or even if((x,y,z)||==(a,b,c)), which would expand to if(x == a || y == b || z == c).
wouldn't that be a nice little time saver?

>>46
interpreter
Lol.

More likely you're looking for slime-compile-defun (C-c C-c). M-. — slime-edit-definition — is useful, but it's more of a cross-referencing tool. You just put the cursor on a top-level form and press C-c C-c, and your new code is compiled and ready to go. It's not exactly a REPL dump, but I'd rather type my code in a file to begin with so I can organize it.

>>50
It's not that I don't separate my code into files, but it's not unusual for me to just spend a lot of time just tweaking things and then having to copy+paste code from my REPL and I would rather my tools took care of this than having to keep interrupting my workflow. Thanks though, I'll need to investigate SLIME further.

>>51
Right, that's what I thought you wanted. Most tools, you can just C-c C-c a definition (or whatever key) and it's sent straight to the Lisp, no cut/paste bullshit. Use a file for a scratch area instead of the REPL, and you're good to go.

Who the hell programs in an REPL loop?