Bruno Barbier <perso.bruno.barb...@free.fr> writes: >> We must also make `comint-prompt-regexp' more precise to avoid "lude> " >> being detected as a prompt. > If we need to do that for ob-haskell (when relying on the interpreter), > the cleanest way might be to redefine the set of possible prompts. ghci > is quite flexible: > GHCi, version 8.10.7 > > :set prompt <prompt> set the prompt used in GHCi > :set prompt-cont <prompt> set the continuation prompt used in GHCi > :set prompt-function <expr> set the function to handle the prompt > :set prompt-cont-function <expr> > set the function to handle the continuation > prompt
This is the approach I used in ob-shell. See `org-babel-shell-set-prompt-commands' and its usage in the code. > Do we have common design principles and/or generic tests that all > languages based on org-babel/ob-comint must pass ? No tests. (I am not sure what can be tested generically). The common design is ob-comint.el API and ob-core.el API. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
