András Major <andras.g.ma...@gmail.com> writes: > Hi Eric, > >> I personally don't have time to make these changes right now, but I'd be >> happy to provide guidance and answer questions to anyone who wanted to >> try to submit a patch. Also, there are a number of files which can >> serve as examples of how to compile and execute code with Babel e.g., >> ob-java.el and ob-C.el. > > That's what I suspected judging from the behaviour I've seen. Is > anyone else interested in such work? I don't have much time either, > in particular I'm not sufficiently familiar with emacs and Lisp to do > something useful quickly. > >> I would prefer to keep haskell as the source block type if only so that >> the blocks are fontified with haskell-mode. However something like an >> :engine or :compiler keyword could be used to specify ghc or hugs. > > Good idea, but specifying ghc is ambiguous: it'll have to be either > ghci, runghc/runhaskell, oder hugs, or maybe some other > interpreter/compiler someone else would like to use (nhc98, etc., > there a quite a few). At least the three options I listed all have > incompatibilities in even the simplest use cases, owing to the > peculiarities of Haskell as a pure, declarative language. >
A more open-ended :compiler or :interpreter header argument accepting ghc, rungch, hugs and nhc98 among others, sounds like a good idea. > > Also, using runghc would require the code block to be tangled first > into a temporary file. Is that easily done in babel? > Very easily, see ob-java.el. Adopting the compile-then-run functionality from there should not be a large task. Best -- Eric > > András > > > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/
