Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
Nick Dokos writes: > Sean O'Halpin wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: >> > Sean O'Halpin wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Eric Schulte >> >> wrote: >> >> > Babel does have a way to bring changes back from pure source code into >> >> > code blocks in an Org-mode document. While it isn't perfect (especially >> >> > if you make extensive use of noweb references or variables) there are >> >> > mechanisms to maintain such a /sync/. To try this out, tangle out code >> >> > with the ":comments yes" header argument, then change an element of the >> >> > tangled source code, and use the `org-babel-detangle' function to bring >> >> > the changes back into the Org-mode document. >> >> > >> >> > Improving the detangling (or "illiterate") features is an area ripe for >> >> > future Babel development. >> >> > > > ...example elided... > >> >> >> >> which doesn't look right to me. >> >> >> > >> > What should it look like? >> > >> > Nick >> > >> To be honest, I don't know what it /should/ look like but I have >> ':comments yes' on three sections and get only one link on output, so >> I can't see how this would detangle properly. >> >> Also, >> >> # [[][main]] >> >> is missing the file reference (in the first set of brackets), so it >> won't work as a link. >> > > Yes, it does look unlikely. I don't know about the other comments (line > numbers, etc.) but at least the link calculation in > org-babel-tangle-collect-blocks is wrong I believe: it uses > org-store-link to supposedly store a link to the current location on the > global org-stored-links stack and then pops it, takes the car of it and > sanitizes text properties of the result: that then becomes the link that > should be stored in the tangled file. > > But it seems that org-store-link does not behave this way when called > non-interactively: I get nothing on the global stack. Instead it seems > to *return* the link as a string, which is then just thrown away. > This all looks to be correct, thanks for debugging this one. I've just pushed up a fix which brings the tangling link-extraction code up to date with the current version of org-store-link. The tangled comments should now appear as fully formed links. However, in testing this I noticed that the code for following these links form a source code file back into the original org-mode file (namely `org-babel-tangle-jump-to-org') is not currently working for some link types (e.g. id: links). The problem here is that there is no org function for parsing/following a link which can be called non-interactively. I'd like to either 1. change org-open-at-point (the function which currently holds all of the org-link following logic) so that it returns an object (probably the buffer, maybe the buffer and point) holding the information on the link target, so that other elisp code can follow org-mode links with something like. #+begin_src emacs-lisp (pop-to-buffer (org-open-link-at-point)) #+end_src 2. or, another option would be to pull the link-parsing logic out of org-open-link-at-point into a separate function which could then be called by org-open-link-at-point, and by other elisp functions wishing to use org-mode links. I'm not comfortable making either of these changes myself without Carsten or Bastien giving their OK. Best -- Eric
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
Sean O'Halpin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: > > Sean O'Halpin wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Eric Schulte > >> wrote: > >> > Babel does have a way to bring changes back from pure source code into > >> > code blocks in an Org-mode document. While it isn't perfect (especially > >> > if you make extensive use of noweb references or variables) there are > >> > mechanisms to maintain such a /sync/. To try this out, tangle out code > >> > with the ":comments yes" header argument, then change an element of the > >> > tangled source code, and use the `org-babel-detangle' function to bring > >> > the changes back into the Org-mode document. > >> > > >> > Improving the detangling (or "illiterate") features is an area ripe for > >> > future Babel development. > >> > ...example elided... > >> > >> which doesn't look right to me. > >> > > > > What should it look like? > > > > Nick > > > To be honest, I don't know what it /should/ look like but I have ':comments > yes' > on three sections and get only one link on output, so I can't see how this > would detangle properly. > > Also, > > # [[][main]] > > is missing the file reference (in the first set of brackets), so it > won't work as a link. > Yes, it does look unlikely. I don't know about the other comments (line numbers, etc.) but at least the link calculation in org-babel-tangle-collect-blocks is wrong I believe: it uses org-store-link to supposedly store a link to the current location on the global org-stored-links stack and then pops it, takes the car of it and sanitizes text properties of the result: that then becomes the link that should be stored in the tangled file. But it seems that org-store-link does not behave this way when called non-interactively: I get nothing on the global stack. Instead it seems to *return* the link as a string, which is then just thrown away. One can argue that org-store-link is wrong to behave this way[fn:1] but I will let Eric and Carsten fight it out :-) Nick Footnotes: [fn:1] assuming that it *does* behave this way and I am not fooling myself.
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: > Sean O'Halpin wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Eric Schulte >> wrote: >> > Babel does have a way to bring changes back from pure source code into >> > code blocks in an Org-mode document. While it isn't perfect (especially >> > if you make extensive use of noweb references or variables) there are >> > mechanisms to maintain such a /sync/. To try this out, tangle out code >> > with the ":comments yes" header argument, then change an element of the >> > tangled source code, and use the `org-babel-detangle' function to bring >> > the changes back into the Org-mode document. >> > >> > Improving the detangling (or "illiterate") features is an area ripe for >> > future Babel development. >> > >> > Cheers -- Eric >> > >> > >> Hi, >> >> Could anyone please give a working example of this? I tried tangling >> the following: >> >> * A tangle example >> >> #+source: body >> #+begin_src ruby :comments yes :noweb yes >> puts "hello" >> #+end_src >> >> #+source: method >> #+begin_src ruby :comments yes :noweb yes >> def hello >> <> >> end >> #+end_src >> >> #+source: main >> #+begin_src ruby :comments yes :tangle detangle.rb :noweb yes >> <> >> hello >> #+end_src >> >> and got the output: >> >> # [[][main]] >> >> def hello >> puts "hello" >> end >> hello >> >> # main ends here >> >> which doesn't look right to me. >> > > What should it look like? > > Nick > To be honest, I don't know what it /should/ look like but I have ':comments yes' on three sections and get only one link on output, so I can't see how this would detangle properly. Also, # [[][main]] is missing the file reference (in the first set of brackets), so it won't work as a link. Regards, Sean P.S. Apologies again for not replying to all first time.
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
Sean O'Halpin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Eric Schulte wrote: > > Babel does have a way to bring changes back from pure source code into > > code blocks in an Org-mode document. While it isn't perfect (especially > > if you make extensive use of noweb references or variables) there are > > mechanisms to maintain such a /sync/. To try this out, tangle out code > > with the ":comments yes" header argument, then change an element of the > > tangled source code, and use the `org-babel-detangle' function to bring > > the changes back into the Org-mode document. > > > > Improving the detangling (or "illiterate") features is an area ripe for > > future Babel development. > > > > Cheers -- Eric > > > > > Hi, > > Could anyone please give a working example of this? I tried tangling > the following: > >* A tangle example > >#+source: body >#+begin_src ruby :comments yes :noweb yes > puts "hello" >#+end_src > >#+source: method >#+begin_src ruby :comments yes :noweb yes > def hello ><> > end >#+end_src > >#+source: main >#+begin_src ruby :comments yes :tangle detangle.rb :noweb yes > <> > hello >#+end_src > > and got the output: > ># [[][main]] > >def hello > puts "hello" >end >hello > ># main ends here > > which doesn't look right to me. > What should it look like? Nick
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Eric Schulte wrote: > Babel does have a way to bring changes back from pure source code into > code blocks in an Org-mode document. While it isn't perfect (especially > if you make extensive use of noweb references or variables) there are > mechanisms to maintain such a /sync/. To try this out, tangle out code > with the ":comments yes" header argument, then change an element of the > tangled source code, and use the `org-babel-detangle' function to bring > the changes back into the Org-mode document. > > Improving the detangling (or "illiterate") features is an area ripe for > future Babel development. > > Cheers -- Eric > > Hi, Could anyone please give a working example of this? I tried tangling the following: * A tangle example #+source: body #+begin_src ruby :comments yes :noweb yes puts "hello" #+end_src #+source: method #+begin_src ruby :comments yes :noweb yes def hello <> end #+end_src #+source: main #+begin_src ruby :comments yes :tangle detangle.rb :noweb yes <> hello #+end_src and got the output: # [[][main]] def hello puts "hello" end hello # main ends here which doesn't look right to me. Regards, Sean
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
Robert Goldman writes: > On 3/30/11 Mar 30 -4:33 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: >> Robert Goldman wrote: >> >>> I would like to do the opposite of literate programming (hence the >>> subject line!): >>> >>> I would like to pull into my org file snippets from a code file. I know >>> that org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files. Is there >>> some way to say "Import the region of this file between these two >>> delimiters?" >>> >>> If not, do you think it would be hard to add this feature? I already >>> have the snappy name, after all! >>> >> >> I don't really understand: can't you cut and paste? > > Yes, but if I cut and paste the text of the code that I am describing > may change out from under my text. If I import the code, it stays in > sync (at least when the document is exported). > Babel does have a way to bring changes back from pure source code into code blocks in an Org-mode document. While it isn't perfect (especially if you make extensive use of noweb references or variables) there are mechanisms to maintain such a /sync/. To try this out, tangle out code with the ":comments yes" header argument, then change an element of the tangled source code, and use the `org-babel-detangle' function to bring the changes back into the Org-mode document. Improving the detangling (or "illiterate") features is an area ripe for future Babel development. Cheers -- Eric
Re: Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
You could probably hack something up with a shell source code block that uses sed to find and display text between two delimiters, and then dump the results to the org-mode file. On Mar 30, 2011 5:44pm, Robert Goldman wrote: On 3/30/11 Mar 30 -4:33 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: > Robert Goldman rpgold...@sift.info> wrote: > >> I would like to do the opposite of literate programming (hence the >> subject line!): >> >> I would like to pull into my org file snippets from a code file. I know >> that org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files. Is there >> some way to say "Import the region of this file between these two >> delimiters?" >> >> If not, do you think it would be hard to add this feature? I already >> have the snappy name, after all! >> > > I don't really understand: can't you cut and paste? Yes, but if I cut and paste the text of the code that I am describing may change out from under my text. If I import the code, it stays in sync (at least when the document is exported). Honestly, I was tempted to do the literate programming thing with babel, but was concerned that it might not work well as a multiple-author thing (I would be writing the document, but someone else might be modifying the code and might find org-babel confusing). > > And what do you mean that "org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code > files"? Is this a facility other than insert-file? Or are you talking about > the #+INCLUDE mechanism? Yes, I was talking about #+INCLUDE. I was really wondering if there mightn't be something like #+INCLUDE ~/myfile.lisp :from "(defun sample-function" :to "; end sample-function" [sorry --- that's word-wrapped to further obscurity.] cheers, r
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
On 3/30/11 Mar 30 -4:33 PM, Nick Dokos wrote: > Robert Goldman wrote: > >> I would like to do the opposite of literate programming (hence the >> subject line!): >> >> I would like to pull into my org file snippets from a code file. I know >> that org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files. Is there >> some way to say "Import the region of this file between these two >> delimiters?" >> >> If not, do you think it would be hard to add this feature? I already >> have the snappy name, after all! >> > > I don't really understand: can't you cut and paste? Yes, but if I cut and paste the text of the code that I am describing may change out from under my text. If I import the code, it stays in sync (at least when the document is exported). Honestly, I was tempted to do the literate programming thing with babel, but was concerned that it might not work well as a multiple-author thing (I would be writing the document, but someone else might be modifying the code and might find org-babel confusing). > > And what do you mean that "org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code > files"? Is this a facility other than insert-file? Or are you talking about > the #+INCLUDE mechanism? Yes, I was talking about #+INCLUDE. I was really wondering if there mightn't be something like #+INCLUDE ~/myfile.lisp :from "(defun sample-function" :to "; end sample-function" [sorry --- that's word-wrapped to further obscurity.] cheers, r
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
Nick Dokos wrote: Robert Goldman wrote: I would like to do the opposite of literate programming (hence the subject line!): I would like to pull into my org file snippets from a code file. I know that org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files. Is there some way to say "Import the region of this file between these two delimiters?" If not, do you think it would be hard to add this feature? I already have the snappy name, after all! I don't really understand: can't you cut and paste? Yes, are you talking about upon exporting a document?
Re: [O] Illiterate programming question
Robert Goldman wrote: > I would like to do the opposite of literate programming (hence the > subject line!): > > I would like to pull into my org file snippets from a code file. I know > that org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files. Is there > some way to say "Import the region of this file between these two > delimiters?" > > If not, do you think it would be hard to add this feature? I already > have the snappy name, after all! > I don't really understand: can't you cut and paste? And what do you mean that "org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files"? Is this a facility other than insert-file? Or are you talking about the #+INCLUDE mechanism? Thanks, Nick
[O] Illiterate programming question
I would like to do the opposite of literate programming (hence the subject line!): I would like to pull into my org file snippets from a code file. I know that org-mode will let me import /entire/ source code files. Is there some way to say "Import the region of this file between these two delimiters?" If not, do you think it would be hard to add this feature? I already have the snappy name, after all! Best, r
