+1 /PA On Tue, 2 Sept 2025 at 19:25, Carlo Tambuatco <oraclmas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is there something wrong with editing the code in question in its own > dedicated buffer > > where lsp-<language> is active then cutting and pasting onto Org Babel? > I mean I think > > creating something like lsp-babel would involve activating multiple > language servers > > simultaneously for each language in an org buffer (you can have any > number of languages > > represented in blocks within an org file)...what's the overhead for that? > > On 9/2/25 1:03 PM, Ângelo Lopes wrote: > > Code editing features in Org Babel are limited, since packages for > > completion, documentation, and navigation tend to break inside the Org > > buffer. While this isn't a major issue in notebook-style workflows > > (we're not building full systems there), it does restrict us to > > relying solely on native major modes for each programming language. > > Would it be possible to create an LSP client for Org (an "org-lsp") > > that captures the contents of source blocks and sends them to a > > language server? Maybe something integrated with Eglot? > > I've been using Org Babel for data analysis and model training, mostly > > with ob-python. Personally, the most valuable feature would be seeing > > function docstrings inline — though ob-python is already quite good as > > it is. > > Org Babel is amazing. Thank you for the great work! >
-- Fragen sind nicht da, um beantwortet zu werden, Fragen sind da um gestellt zu werden Georg Kreisler Sagen's Paradeiser, write BE! Year 1 of the New Koprocracy
