Re: tangling from multiple files
> On Mar 18, 2020, at 6:29 PM, David Bremner wrote: > > "Berry, Charles" writes: > >>> On Mar 17, 2020, at 4:21 PM, David Bremner wrote: >>> >>> >>> I've seen this question around e.g. stack overflow, but none of the >>> answers I found seems really satisfactory. >>> >>> I'd like to share a set of begin_src / end_src blocks in a.org between >>> b.org and c.org; in particular b.org and c.org contain noweb references >>> to names defined in a.org. Is there a better way than using >>> (org-babel-lob-ingest "a.org")? This seems a bit clunky, requiring >>> manual action every time a.org changes. >>> >> >> >> Put >> >> #+include: ./a./org >> >> directives in b.org and c.org >> >> You might want to put the directives inside a non-exported drawer. See >> `org-export-with-drawers’ docstring. > > This works fine (modulo the extra /) for exporting, but doesn't seem to > work for tangling. Does it work for tangling for you; i.e. is b.scm > produced with the two defines in it? > Right. It does not work directly for tangling. So also use #+export_file_name: b2.org (say) Then load ox-ob.el, export as C-c C-e O o (org-org-export-to-org), visit b2.org and tangle from there. HTH, Chuck
Re: tangling from multiple files
"Berry, Charles" writes: >> On Mar 17, 2020, at 4:21 PM, David Bremner wrote: >> >> >> I've seen this question around e.g. stack overflow, but none of the >> answers I found seems really satisfactory. >> >> I'd like to share a set of begin_src / end_src blocks in a.org between >> b.org and c.org; in particular b.org and c.org contain noweb references >> to names defined in a.org. Is there a better way than using >> (org-babel-lob-ingest "a.org")? This seems a bit clunky, requiring >> manual action every time a.org changes. >> > > > Put > > #+include: ./a./org > > directives in b.org and c.org > > You might want to put the directives inside a non-exported drawer. See > `org-export-with-drawers’ docstring. This works fine (modulo the extra /) for exporting, but doesn't seem to work for tangling. Does it work for tangling for you; i.e. is b.scm produced with the two defines in it? d
Re: tangling from multiple files
> On Mar 17, 2020, at 4:21 PM, David Bremner wrote: > > > I've seen this question around e.g. stack overflow, but none of the > answers I found seems really satisfactory. > > I'd like to share a set of begin_src / end_src blocks in a.org between > b.org and c.org; in particular b.org and c.org contain noweb references > to names defined in a.org. Is there a better way than using > (org-babel-lob-ingest "a.org")? This seems a bit clunky, requiring > manual action every time a.org changes. > Put #+include: ./a./org directives in b.org and c.org You might want to put the directives inside a non-exported drawer. See `org-export-with-drawers’ docstring. HTH, Chuck > For example, here is a.org > > #+name: x.scm > #+begin_src scheme > (define x 1) > #+end_src > > #+name: y.scm > #+begin_src scheme > (define y 2) > #+end_src > > and here is b.org. You can imagine c is similar, but maybe swaps the > order of x and y > > #+begin_src scheme :tangle "b.scm" :noweb strip-export > <> > <> > #+end_src > > # Local Variables: > # eval: (org-babel-lob-ingest "a.org") > # End: > >
Re: org-pop-mode
On 3/18/20 4:24 PM, Adam Porter wrote: BTW, in the body of your email, the text you write has these two characters between sentences: " ". The second is a plain space, but the first is a Unicode non-breaking space, or "C-x 8 RET a0". I noticed because it's displayed in Emacs as an underline character next to the plain space. Huh! Interesting. Because I know for a fact that I'm hitting the space bar twice and not a NBSP. (I use and maintain https://github.com/kragen/xcompose so I can type all kinds of things; NBSP is Multi-Key Space Space). I guess because my mailer has me composing things in HTML mode, and I double-space my periods, and it's thinking "strings of whitespace are collapsed into a single space in HTML! I'd better do something to make sure those extra spaces, which he took so much care to type, aren't lost!" and makes on a NBSP to take up extra space. (There was recently a whole discussion on the Unicode mailing list about how 0x00A0 is almost universally used as a fixed-width space when the specs say it should be flex-width, sigh.) ~mark
Hiding emphasis markers
On 3/18/20 4:58 AM, Norman Tovey-Walsh wrote: Mark E. Shoulson writes: On 2/19/20 2:39 AM, Bastien wrote: - org-hide-emphasis-markers => t Just to note: I've been working on a minor-mode in which the emphasis markers are "invisible" but not hidden (i.e. they still take up space, […] size, so the extra space is not quite as obvious. Does this sound interesting to anyone? Right now the code is kind of a mess, but it could be refined. Sounds interesting to me. All right, then, you asked for it. It's really very sloppy code right now; I'm just playing around to see what works. Comments are kind of stream-of-consciousness, they may be out of date wrt what works and what doesn't etc. But hey, have fun. https://gist.github.com/clsn/819a6463b1741eb465b310c39b4902a1 ~mark
Re: Spaces in bare URLs?
On 3/18/20 5:43 AM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: Hello, "Mark E. Shoulson" writes: So... what is one supposed to do about spaces in URLs? When they're in [[link format]], with or without a description, it's no problem, but org-mode has a long tradition of support for "bare" URLs too. We're used to being able to type a URL or other link format and have it work, right? And that doesn't seem (to me) to be a thing that we'd want to abandon. In org-mode 9.1.9, I can type "info:elisp#Syntactic%20Font%20Lock" and it'd work. (Maybe not the greatest example, since %-encoding is seen more with http-based URIs, but still). The percent-encoding is well-established and reliable Unfortunately, that wasn't reliable. As it is not idempotent, you can never know how many times you need to decode an URL before sending it. Well, any form of escaping is pretty much by definition not idempotent. That's the whole point of escaping: you have something you can't say, so you make some magical character that changes the meaning of nearby characters so you can describe it in characters you can't say. And the price you pay is that now you can no longer say your magical character plain, you have to use another form of escaping to express it (usually the same form as the others). It's like how it's impossible to compress *every* file to make it smaller and some even have to get bigger. The pigeonhole principle shows _why_ it isn't possible, and escaping shows (one way) _how_ it isn't: say you use high-ascii bytes to represent common strings or something. How do you represent them when they're really in the text? You have to escape them... which makes your file *larger*. The thing is URL encoding is not for human consumption, i.e., we shouldn't have to deal with it. This is a good point. While on one hand it makes sense to be able to type URLs that have spaces in them without spaces, it is sort of ridiculous to expect users feel "natural" about typing "%20" instead. (I think this is why the specs say that you can also escape a space by using the "+" character, in order to make it easier for this most-common of characters... but that weird exception has caused all kinds of hassles in code from that day to this; I know from my own experience.) and you can *count* on it when nothing else works, because you can always fall back on plain ascii. Current backslash escaping is also well established, and as much ASCII-like as anyone would expect. Really? As ASCII-like as I could expect? What if my URL is https://he.wikipedia.com/שלום_עליכם ? If I am in some backward environment (still all too common) where all I can rely on is ASCII, I can percent-encode the UTF-8 representation and it will work. Can we count on being able to backslash-quote things clear down to ASCII? I don't see a way in the docs I've seen. But that won't work in org-mode 9.3.6. Nor will "info:elisp#Syntactic Font Lock" or "info:elisp#Syntactic\ Font\ Lock" or any other variant I've tried, short of putting it inside [[]]s or <>s (in other words, no longer using a bare URL). True, but that's a minor annoyance. You apparently prefer to encode a URL manually, replacing each space with %20 (and other characters with more baroque escape sequences), rather than adding <...> (or [[...]]) around it and be done with it. Perhaps this one was the bad idea, after all? Yes, using <>s works, as does [[]]. And yes, I do have to concede that claiming it should be "natural" for a user to hand-escape things with %20s is sort of ridiculous. Having to reprocess all old org-files for such a common notation still seems like more trouble than it was worth, but then you didn't ask me (and you were QUITE RIGHT not to do so!) I guess a converter-script should also enclose bare URLs in <>, at least if they have spaces or other whitespace. Still don't know about org-protocol and store-link, because I'm lazy. Right now, at least some of the emacsen I'm working with still use org-9.1.9, so I haven't converted anything. ~mark
Re: org-pop-mode
"Mark E. Shoulson" writes: > Heh; fair enough. The filename originally was "org-level-end.el", I > think; I started using the catchier "org-pop" because... well, it was > catchier. It made sense in my mind, in the "push"/"pop" sense used > with stacks in programming, that you "push" to a deeper level and this > library would allow you to "pop" back up to a higher one. I'll see if > I can think of something better, thanks. Well, org-heading-push-pop wouldn't be a /great/ name, but the push/pop paradigm is understandable, so you might consider that. :) > >> 2. In the code, I saw you comment about cl-flet, and I see you using >> fset and unwind-protect in the org-pop-with-continuations macro. >> Instead, use cl-letf with symbol-function, like: >> >>(cl-letf* (((symbol-function 'foo) >>#'my-foo) >> ((symbol-function 'bar) >>(lambda () >> ...))) >> BODY) >> >> See also Nic Ferrier's package, noflet. > > I'll take a look, thanks. It's questionable whether I really should > even be messing about with that macro anyway. I musnt have removed the > comments, but I had a whole thing there about how I had been trying > with cl-letf and/or cl-flet and it didn't work. Thing is, cl-flet, > according to the docs, (info:cl#Function Bindings) is strictly > *lexical* binding, which is not going to cut it. cl-letf might be > different; the docs are different about it, but I am pretty sure I > tried it and it didn't work, or didn't work "enough of the time." But > maybe I had it wrong, and maybe noflet will succeed. The issue is what the macros expand to. cl-letf rebinds the function symbols, just like fset, so it affects all code that runs in Emacs until the function symbols are set again. cl-flet expands into lambdas bound to variables and replaces calls to them with funcall, so it only affects calls in the macro's body. Use pp-macroexpand-last-sexp to see the expansions. BTW, in the body of your email, the text you write has these two characters between sentences: " ". The second is a plain space, but the first is a Unicode non-breaking space, or "C-x 8 RET a0". I noticed because it's displayed in Emacs as an underline character next to the plain space.
Re: org-pop-mode
On 3/18/20 3:15 PM, Adam Porter wrote: "Mark E. Shoulson" writes: This is something I've wanted for years in org-mode, but which in some ways could actually be _offensive_ to its ideals. If you're an outline purist, look away. ... So, I present a pre-alpha version, https://gist.github.com/clsn/09ac4b098b6ad7366bb5e0bc2d5f of org-pop-mode. To "pop" back up, create a headline at the level you're popping back to, and give it a tag of "contd", and the headline text should not be something important. Instructions and explanations are in the comments of the file (the part about installing from MELPA is a lie, though). Any feedback? Hi Mark, Indeed, this is something that is frequently asked about. I probably wouldn't use it myself, but it looks like you've done a good job on it. Here is some feedback: 1. I'd suggest a more descriptive name, especially if you plan to publish it to MELPA. org-pop doesn't seem to convey anything about what it does. :) Heh; fair enough. The filename originally was "org-level-end.el", I think; I started using the catchier "org-pop" because... well, it was catchier. It made sense in my mind, in the "push"/"pop" sense used with stacks in programming, that you "push" to a deeper level and this library would allow you to "pop" back up to a higher one. I'll see if I can think of something better, thanks. 2. In the code, I saw you comment about cl-flet, and I see you using fset and unwind-protect in the org-pop-with-continuations macro. Instead, use cl-letf with symbol-function, like: (cl-letf* (((symbol-function 'foo) #'my-foo) ((symbol-function 'bar) (lambda () ...))) BODY) See also Nic Ferrier's package, noflet. I'll take a look, thanks. It's questionable whether I really should even be messing about with that macro anyway. I must have removed the comments, but I had a whole thing there about how I had been trying with cl-letf and/or cl-flet and it didn't work. Thing is, cl-flet, according to the docs, (info:cl#Function Bindings) is strictly *lexical* binding, which is not going to cut it. cl-letf might be different; the docs are different about it, but I am pretty sure I tried it and it didn't work, or didn't work "enough of the time." But maybe I had it wrong, and maybe noflet will succeed. Thanks! ~mark
Re: org-pop-mode
On 3/18/20 3:00 AM, Ihor Radchenko wrote: Any feedback? >From the first glance it does not look too different from inline headings. Could you highlight the difference? Best, Ihor Well, it's true there is similarity. I even found in my notes where I noticed inline tasks and their similarity, but all I wrote there was "but mine is different," so maybe that isn't so helpful. I have not used inline tasks, and was only barely familiar with them (I did know they existed, though), so that is my excuse for having invented my own wheel. In terms of differences, let's see: inline tasks are, from a strict outline point-of-view, a zillion levels down (approximately), which makes them indent wy over if you're using org-indent-mode. My org-pop is the "normal," expected single level down. inline tasks mark the end of the task with a special header at the same level as the task. Org-pop marks the end of the digression with a special header at the same level as the "base" (the surrounding text). Your call as to what makes better sense. inline tasks are well-integrated and worked deep into the innards of org-mode, to the point that it seems from looking at code that they cause something of a headache to developers with their exceptional behavior. On the plus side, that means that many/most packages will Do the Right Thing in the face of inline tasks. My org-pop is new and non-standard, with hacks to make a few key things work right with it, but doesn't have the support of... well, anything else. I'm pretty sure exporting works well with inline tasks, but currently org-pop has no special tweaks for it (I'm not even sure what they should be). This is a reason to stick with inline tasks. Both approaches sinfully break the underlying outline-mode structure, which explicitly forbids exactly what we're trying to accomplish with them. Inline tasks have (way) more seniority and support and indulgence for doing so, though. I haven't experimented much with inline tasks as regards the two or three behaviors that I actually cared enough about to write org-pop; have to see if they do something like I would have wanted. Thanks! ~mark
Re: org-pop-mode
"Mark E. Shoulson" writes: > This is something I've wanted for years in org-mode, but which in some > ways could actually be _offensive_ to its ideals. If you're an > outline purist, look away. > > ... > > So, I present a pre-alpha version, > https://gist.github.com/clsn/09ac4b098b6ad7366bb5e0bc2d5f of > org-pop-mode. To "pop" back up, create a headline at the level you're > popping back to, and give it a tag of "contd", and the headline text > should not be something important. Instructions and explanations are > in the comments of the file (the part about installing from MELPA is a > lie, though). > > Any feedback? Hi Mark, Indeed, this is something that is frequently asked about. I probably wouldn't use it myself, but it looks like you've done a good job on it. Here is some feedback: 1. I'd suggest a more descriptive name, especially if you plan to publish it to MELPA. org-pop doesn't seem to convey anything about what it does. :) 2. In the code, I saw you comment about cl-flet, and I see you using fset and unwind-protect in the org-pop-with-continuations macro. Instead, use cl-letf with symbol-function, like: (cl-letf* (((symbol-function 'foo) #'my-foo) ((symbol-function 'bar) (lambda () ...))) BODY) See also Nic Ferrier's package, noflet.
Re: ob-calc duplicate stack-element issue
On Wednesday, 18 Mar 2020 at 17:23, Marco Wahl wrote: > Possibly the originators thought about the typical use of calc blocks as > units which reduce to the top element of the stack. In this case the > calc-pop would be the right step to clean the stack. Could be. Indeed, at the moment, if you pop up calc directly, it does look the same as however you left it the last time you used it and not popping the stack would ruin that feature. So, changing ob-calc to not pop the result off might be undesirable after all. -- : Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.3.6-432-g73bd24
Re: ob-calc duplicate stack-element issue
Eric S Fraga writes: > On Wednesday, 18 Mar 2020 at 15:47, Marco Wahl wrote: >> AFAICS at the org babel calc evaluation the last value of the calc stack >> gets dropped. >> >> So your workaround is okay, I think. You can just write any dummy >> element at the bottom of each block e.g. just 0. No need of >> duplication. Looks a bit hackish to me but so what? > > Indeed hackish. But it does beg the question: why does ob-calc pop the > stack? I cannot see any use case given that the stack is essentially > infinite and can be safely ignored (in most if not all cases). > > Could the solution be to simply remove the =(calc-pop 1)= line at the > end of =org-babel-execute:calc= function? > > Just a thought. Possibly the originators thought about the typical use of calc blocks as units which reduce to the top element of the stack. In this case the calc-pop would be the right step to clean the stack. Just another thought. Ciao, -- Marco
Re: ob-calc duplicate stack-element issue
On Wednesday, 18 Mar 2020 at 15:47, Marco Wahl wrote: > AFAICS at the org babel calc evaluation the last value of the calc stack > gets dropped. > > So your workaround is okay, I think. You can just write any dummy > element at the bottom of each block e.g. just 0. No need of > duplication. Looks a bit hackish to me but so what? Indeed hackish. But it does beg the question: why does ob-calc pop the stack? I cannot see any use case given that the stack is essentially infinite and can be safely ignored (in most if not all cases). Could the solution be to simply remove the =(calc-pop 1)= line at the end of =org-babel-execute:calc= function? Just a thought. -- : Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.3.6-432-g73bd24
Re: ob-calc duplicate stack-element issue
Heiko Schmidt writes: > - problem: When evaluating the calc snippets the top of stack element > is dropped. Because every "begin/end_src calc" block drops the top > of stack, one can't reuse the result in following blocks. > Number of cars (PKW) in germany: > > #+begin_src calc :exports both > 45e6 > #+end_src > > > #+RESULTS: > : 4500. > > Yearly mileage in [km/y] > > #+begin_src calc :exports both > 15000 > #+end_src > > > #+RESULTS: > : 15000 > > Calculate amount of complete km per year > > #+begin_src calc :exports both > '* > #+end_src > > > #+RESULTS: > : 6750. > - problem: babel removes the resulting top stack element from the > stack > > - tried solution: duplicate the last stack-element on evaluation with > "' " (emulate press to duplicate the top element of the > stack in calc) > ** hope for a solution or work around from the community > > - preferred: Is there a way to leave the top of stack from one snippet > to the next (which I don't know)? > - alternative: Is there a way to duplicate the top of stack element > between begin/end_src calc blocks? > - any advice is appreciated. Okay. I take here the "any advice is appreciated" part. AFAICS at the org babel calc evaluation the last value of the calc stack gets dropped. So your workaround is okay, I think. You can just write any dummy element at the bottom of each block e.g. just 0. No need of duplication. Looks a bit hackish to me but so what? Another approach could be "noweb". Example (you would just evaluate the block at the bottom): --8<---cut here---start->8--- Number of cars (PKW) in germany: #+name: numcars #+begin_src calc :exports both 45e6 #+end_src Yearly mileage in [km/y] #+name: mileage #+begin_src calc :exports both 15000 #+end_src Calculate amount of complete km per year #+begin_src calc :noweb yes <> <> '* #+end_src --8<---cut here---end--->8--- HTH, -- Marco
Re: Spaces in bare URLs?
Hello, "Mark E. Shoulson" writes: > So, in the "new" org-mode, we've done away with standard > percent-encoding of URLs, in favor of a more... idiosyncratic method > using backslashes. ... > So... what is one supposed to do about spaces in URLs? > When they're in [[link format]], with or without a description, it's no > problem, but org-mode has a long tradition of support for "bare" URLs too. > We're used to being able to type a URL or other link format > and have it work, right? And that doesn't seem (to me) to be a thing > that we'd want to abandon. > > In org-mode 9.1.9, I can type "info:elisp#Syntactic%20Font%20Lock" and it'd > work. (Maybe not the greatest example, since %-encoding is seen more with > http-based URIs, but still). The > percent-encoding is well-established and reliable Unfortunately, that wasn't reliable. As it is not idempotent, you can never know how many times you need to decode an URL before sending it. Imagine I have a file called "foo%2000.org". Should I link it file:foo%252000.org or file:foo%2000.org? You prefer the former. But what if I forget about the rules? Now, what Org is expected to do with file:foo%252000.org ? Decoding it unconditionally lead to bug reports scattered throughout the years. So did ignoring encoding. The thing is URL encoding is not for human consumption, i.e., we shouldn't have to deal with it. > and you can *count* on it when nothing else works, because you can > always fall back on plain ascii. Current backslash escaping is also well established, and as much ASCII-like as anyone would expect. > But that won't work in org-mode 9.3.6. Nor will > "info:elisp#Syntactic Font Lock" or "info:elisp#Syntactic\ Font\ Lock" > or any other variant I've tried, short of putting it inside [[]]s or > <>s (in other words, no longer using a bare URL). True, but that's a minor annoyance. You apparently prefer to encode a URL manually, replacing each space with %20 (and other characters with more baroque escape sequences), rather than adding <...> (or [[...]]) around it and be done with it. Perhaps this one was the bad idea, after all? > I think dropping percent-escaping of URLs was a bad idea, in terms of > breaking past usage and lack of consistency with the standard used for URLs > everywhere else. But I don't know what impelled the > decision to drop it, so I might well be missing something important. > > At any rate, it does leave a hole in what org-mode can do, a thing it used to > be able to do and can't anymore. Is there a right way to do > this? (without using delimiters.) It was not a bad idea. It is not perfect, but it is still better than what we had, because it is unambiguous. You can still use <...> delimiters, or, as you noted, [[...]]. I understand it breaks your workflow, but there is no loss of feature, and no hole either: you can still link to URL with spaces in it. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: Survey: changing a few default settings for Org 9.4
Mark E. Shoulson writes: > On 2/19/20 2:39 AM, Bastien wrote: >> - org-hide-emphasis-markers => t > > Just to note: I've been working on a minor-mode in which the emphasis > markers are "invisible" but not hidden (i.e. they still take up space, […] > size, so the extra space is not quite as obvious. Does this sound > interesting to anyone? Right now the code is kind of a mess, but it > could be refined. Sounds interesting to me. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Tovey-Walsh https://nwalsh.com/ > Why is there always money for war and not for education? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: org-pop-mode
> Any feedback? >From the first glance it does not look too different from inline headings. Could you highlight the difference? Best, Ihor "Mark E. Shoulson" writes: > This is something I've wanted for years in org-mode, but which in some > ways could actually be _offensive_ to its ideals. If you're an outline > purist, look away. > > > It's something we can do with plain lists: work on a list item at level > X, then make a sublist at level X+1, and then "pop" back up to the same > list item you had been working on at level X, without needing a new > header. You just adjust the indentation. > > > + Some stuff at this level. > > + More stuff at this level. > > Might even have multiple paragraphs. > > - a sublevel, for a digression > > > And back to the same higher level, even without a new bullet. > > > I use org-mode to keep daily notes at work, sometimes almost > stream-of-consciousness, and often wished I could digress and then pop back. > > > So, I present a pre-alpha version, > https://gist.github.com/clsn/09ac4b098b6ad7366bb5e0bc2d5f of > org-pop-mode. To "pop" back up, create a headline at the level you're > popping back to, and give it a tag of "contd", and the headline text > should not be something important. Instructions and explanations are in > the comments of the file (the part about installing from MELPA is a lie, > though). > > > Any feedback? > > > ~mark > -- Ihor Radchenko, PhD, Center for Advancing Materials Performance from the Nanoscale (CAMP-nano) State Key Laboratory for Mechanical Behavior of Materials, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China Email: yanta...@gmail.com, ihor_radche...@alumni.sutd.edu.sg
