Hmmm...
I looked a bit into it and it seems screen can log the session into a
file. org-mode could read the total number of lines of that file before
executing a new block of the same session and add the number of line
feeds for the executed source code block. Hence, we would know at which
point the "result" would start.
However, this would add the entire output of the source code block as
result.
One could limit the result to the last send command by the above method
too. Just splitting the source code block internally into two parts. The
first one contains all but the last command, the second contains only
the last command.
As for noweb, I can't see from the source code why it should not work.
Does someone have an idea about that. I gave names to all my source code
blocks. Then I defined a source code block with the header argument
:noweb true. However all <<names>> lines are send to screen instead of
the content of so called source code blocks.
I also looked into variables. However, this seems to be a bit tricky,
the problem is screen runs interactively, hence, you could run all kind
of other stuff in the screen session, e.g., python, emacs, a serial
terminal, etc. . How could org-mode know if it has to warp the variable
according to python-, shell-, lisp- or any other syntax.
Might it be possible (and does it make sense) to simply enable some kind
of macro-like replacement. E.g.
:var _X_=3
would replace all _X_ by 3. There would be no formal syntax and no
format rules. Just a simple greedy search and replace. Thus, the user
can/have to think by himself how a variable name would have to look like
to get no conflict with the target language.
E.g.
:var var=12
could be a bad idea if the source code would be
test = var
var2 = 12
def variant():
because it would be replaced by
test = 12
122 = 12
def 12iant():
We could not rely on spaces around variables because some languages
might not allow spaces. That is
test=12 can not be written test = 12
However, source code blocks are normally relatively small and the user
could use any kind of scheme which makes a distinction with the target
language within screen easy (using all kind of seldom used characters
_,%,#, etc.)
Any thoughts or ideas?
I really like the interactive screen functionality which allows me to
perform all kind of tasks interactively within a screen session.
Torsten
On 12/17/2011 06:38 PM, Torsten Wagner wrote:
Hi,
recently I discovered babel in combination with screen. I really like it.
However, I tried to use noweb but it seems not to work. Getting it working
would allow to write "tasks" and arbitrary combine them to bigger tasks.
I would be interested in results too. Would be nice to receive some
feedback from above tasks. Thus, one could document the success or
results. For now I have to copy results from the screen terminal which is
kind of error prone.
Any chance to enhance ob-screen with the above features?
Totti
