Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Aaron Ecay wrote: 2015ko urtarrilak 23an, Sebastien Vauban-ek idatzi zuen: Since = and ~ have been inverted, I think it'd make sense to make `org-babel-inline-result-wrap' now default to ~%s (instead of =%s), for markup that produces verbatim text. Here is the patch. If I understand this thread correctly, = is now consistently interpreted as verbatim and ~ as code. I think verbatim (i.e. the status quo) is what makes sense for inline babel results – results are not generally speaking code (though of course in special cases they can be). I’m not sure what you mean by That will put fix back as what they were for people having different CSS or LaTeX styles applied to both markers. I mean that some of us may have applied CSS to differentiate among code and verbatim in HTML. Anyway, I do agree with you that defaulting to verbatim (instead of code) makes more sense, in fact, for results of inline babel code blocks. Case closed! Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hello, Sebastien Vauban wrote: Bastien wrote: Hi Yasushi, Michael and Nicolas, Michael Brand michael.ch.br...@gmail.com writes: The syntax for inline code snippets seems easier to read by human and to parse with ~ than with = because inline code snippets use ~ less often than =. I avoid ~/ by using $HOME/ in my notes about shell and shell scripts. Some examples: I've now fix those inconsistencies, both in the manual and in the code. I followed Michael suggestion to use ~code~ and =verbatim=. We may need to update the way export backend treat this markup, and try to be consistent here too. Since = and ~ have been inverted, I think it'd make sense to make `org-babel-inline-result-wrap' now default to ~%s (instead of =%s), for markup that produces verbatim text. Here is the patch. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban From 4168c424e3c112748951177121b1a4dcb5b712a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastien Vauban sva-n...@mygooglest.com Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 20:17:25 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Replace `=' by `~' in `org-babel-inline-result-wrap' * ob-core.el (org-babel-inline-result-wrap): Replace `=' by `~'. --- lisp/ob-core.el | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lisp/ob-core.el b/lisp/ob-core.el index 24b83d6..5fd4119 100644 --- a/lisp/ob-core.el +++ b/lisp/ob-core.el @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ ;;; ob-core.el --- working with code blocks in org-mode -;; Copyright (C) 2009-2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc. +;; Copyright (C) 2009-2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc. ;; Authors: Eric Schulte ;; Dan Davison @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ See also `org-babel-noweb-wrap-start'. :group 'org-babel :type 'string) -(defcustom org-babel-inline-result-wrap =%s= +(defcustom org-babel-inline-result-wrap ~%s~ Format string used to wrap inline results. This string must include a \%s\ which will be replaced by the results. :group 'org-babel -- 2.1.1
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hi Sebastien, 2015ko urtarrilak 23an, Sebastien Vauban-ek idatzi zuen: Since = and ~ have been inverted, I think it'd make sense to make `org-babel-inline-result-wrap' now default to ~%s (instead of =%s), for markup that produces verbatim text. Here is the patch. If I understand this thread correctly, = is now consistently interpreted as verbatim and ~ as code. I think verbatim (i.e. the status quo) is what makes sense for inline babel results – results are not generally speaking code (though of course in special cases they can be). I’m not sure what you mean by That will put fix back as what they were for people having different CSS or LaTeX styles applied to both markers. It sounds like perhaps there are user customizations which are out of date with this change. Maybe an announcement is needed in ORG-NEWS to raise awareness of this change. Thanks, -- Aaron Ecay
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hello, Bastien wrote: Hi Yasushi, Michael and Nicolas, Michael Brand michael.ch.br...@gmail.com writes: The syntax for inline code snippets seems easier to read by human and to parse with ~ than with = because inline code snippets use ~ less often than =. I avoid ~/ by using $HOME/ in my notes about shell and shell scripts. Some examples: I've now fix those inconsistencies, both in the manual and in the code. I followed Michael suggestion to use ~code~ and =verbatim=. We may need to update the way export backend treat this markup, and try to be consistent here too. Since = and ~ have been inverted, I think it'd make sense to make `org-babel-inline-result-wrap' now default to ~%s (instead of =%s), for markup that produces verbatim text. That will put fix back as what they were for people having different CSS or LaTeX styles applied to both markers. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hi Yasushi, Michael and Nicolas, Michael Brand michael.ch.br...@gmail.com writes: The syntax for inline code snippets seems easier to read by human and to parse with ~ than with = because inline code snippets use ~ less often than =. I avoid ~/ by using $HOME/ in my notes about shell and shell scripts. Some examples: I've now fix those inconsistencies, both in the manual and in the code. I followed Michael suggestion to use ~code~ and =verbatim=. We may need to update the way export backend treat this markup, and try to be consistent here too. Thanks, -- Bastien
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hi Nicolas, At Sun, 16 Feb 2014 10:20:55 +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: If we do change them, it should only happen in org-element.el. I don't think that would break existing documents, as code and verbatim are really close to each other. I don't care either way. Though, I lean towards the first option, as I like = as verbatim (which may be the source of the initial confusion). I'd suggest to keep documentation, and fix the code. Because, our document serves our _user_ as the interface definition and it's already been widely accepted. Users expect to have marked up code segment if they have =code= in their document. ;; It might be just me but I've been seen =code= in this mailing list ;; many times but never noticed ~code~, for example. -- yashi
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hi, At Sat, 15 Feb 2014 09:23:41 -0500, Nick Dokos wrote: I think it's a code bug: ~verbatim~ is the precedent-setting latex convention. However fixing it might break existing documents (although in many instances code and verbatim are treated equivalently, so that might not be much of a problem). A quick grep on export back-ends reveals that some back-ends uses them differently. Namely - latex - man - org ;-) - texinfo Should I just leave as-is? -- yashi
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hello, Yasushi SHOJI ya...@atmark-techno.com writes: Nick Dokos wrote: I think it's a code bug: ~verbatim~ is the precedent-setting latex convention. However fixing it might break existing documents (although in many instances code and verbatim are treated equivalently, so that might not be much of a problem). A quick grep on export back-ends reveals that some back-ends uses them differently. Namely - latex - man - org ;-) - texinfo Should I just leave as-is? If we leave it as-is, documentation needs to be updated anyway. If we do change them, it should only happen in org-element.el. I don't think that would break existing documents, as code and verbatim are really close to each other. I don't care either way. Though, I lean towards the first option, as I like = as verbatim (which may be the source of the initial confusion). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hi Nicolas On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com wrote: If we leave it as-is, documentation needs to be updated anyway. If we do change them, it should only happen in org-element.el. I don't think that would break existing documents, as code and verbatim are really close to each other. I don't care either way. Though, I lean towards the first option, as I like = as verbatim (which may be the source of the initial confusion). When I read org-element-text-markup-successor ((equal marker ~) 'code) ((equal marker =) 'verbatim) it confuses me because of the well known Org manual You can make words *bold*, /italic/, _underlined_, =code= and ~verbatim~ Michael
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hello, Michael Brand michael.ch.br...@gmail.com writes: When I read org-element-text-markup-successor ((equal marker ~) 'code) ((equal marker =) 'verbatim) it confuses me because of the well known Org manual You can make words *bold*, /italic/, _underlined_, =code= and ~verbatim~ Indeed, that's the very issue we're discussing in this thread. I'm not sure to understand what you mean here. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Hi Nicolas On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed, that's the very issue we're discussing in this thread. I'm not sure to understand what you mean here. For me it was not explicit enough that this ((equal marker ~) 'code) ((equal marker =) 'verbatim) is the part discussed. I am not sure if it is that simple but just from the word code and from the usage on Worg I tend to conclude that for inline code snippets 'code should be preferred and 'verbatim only be used for non-code things more similar to just like an inline quote. Only if this distinction should really matter then keeping the above code unchanged and changing the Org manual from =code= ~verbatim~ to ~code~ =verbatim= would have the following advantage: The syntax for inline code snippets seems easier to read by human and to parse with ~ than with = because inline code snippets use ~ less often than =. I avoid ~/ by using $HOME/ in my notes about shell and shell scripts. Some examples: Bla ~a = 1~ bla, bla ~b=2~ bla, bla ~local my_variable= # Bash shell: Set to empty value.~ bla, bla ~source $HOME/.profile~ bla. vs. Bla =a = 1= bla, bla =b=2= bla, bla =local my_variable= # Bash shell: Set to empty value.= bla, bla =source $HOME/.profile= bla. Michael
Re: [O] parser: verbatim or code?
Yasushi SHOJI ya...@atmark-techno.com writes: Hello, While writing a new exporter I've noticed that `=' is actually for verbatim and `~' is for code emphasis despite the fact that the current org manual says: You can make words *bold*, /italic/, _underlined_, =code= and ~verbatim~ Is this documentation bug? I think it's a code bug: ~verbatim~ is the precedent-setting latex convention. However fixing it might break existing documents (although in many instances code and verbatim are treated equivalently, so that might not be much of a problem). -- Nick
