That is understandable; they're big patches. I recommend going over ob-java
first. Java is probably more familiar to you and ob-java and ob-haxe are
very similar. These were mostly based on ob-python and ob-C. The tests are
based on ob-Cs tests.

Look carefully at org-babel-temp-dir and
org-babel-remove-temporary-directory. The patches override core but ideally
these would be changes in core.

I was hesitant to put these in ELPA because then the tests won't run when
org-mode is modified.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 12:56 AM Kyle Meyer <> wrote:

> ian martins writes:
> > I posted patches for ob-java and ob-haxe a couple months ago but there
> was
> > no interest. I have been given access to push to contrib. If there's no
> > objection I'll put them there.
> >
> > I'll rename my version ob-java-alt so it doesn't conflict with the
> official
> > one. The contrib directory doesn't have a "testing" directory so I'll add
> > one. I'll document them in worg.
> My understanding is that there's been a move away from adding new
> libraries to contrib/, instead preferring an ELPA for cases where core
> isn't deemed appropriate.
> Fixes and enhancements to ob-java are obviously appropriate for core.
> And while it'd be fine to host ob-haxe separately, my impression is that
> it too would be suitable for core.
> I'm sorry your patches haven't gotten any reviews or other feedback.
> I've sat down a couple of times to review the ob-haxe patch but haven't
> ended up blocking off enough time to get anywhere.  I'll revisit it this
> weekend.  Of course, any feedback from those that actually use haxe
> would be appreciated.

Reply via email to