On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:31:04 +0100 Joris van der Hoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Felix and David, > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 12:19:33PM +0000, Felix Breuer wrote: > > almost a year ago I published a working version of a small literate > > programming > > system for use with TeXmacs. > [...] > > I started working on a proper plugin for TeXmacs, but then realized that for > [...] > > I followed a bit of your discussion. > Let me quickly tell you a few thoughts: > > 1) I think that source files with TeXmacs comments (a la David) and > TeXmacs files with special serializing/export (a la Felix) > are both of independent interest. To avoid misunderstandings: I think there were actually three concepts in discussion, namely 1) David's original idea: Use TeXmacs to work on source files that have tm markup as comments. 2) My original idea: Generate (multiple) source files (without comments) from a single TeXmacs document. 3) What I am currently suggesting: Serialize a TeXmacs document as a source file where TeXmacs markup is commented. (This is a variant of David's suggestion.) I am in favour of 3) because it seems to be the easiest way to get a literate programming system that works both ways. > 2) In both cases, notice that you may wish to override the standard > load and save routines. Using the contextual overloading mechanism > this can be done extremely elegantly, just by redefining > load-buffer/save-buffer in case that the user included a certain > style package. The overloaded routine would typically do some > (un)commenting or additional serialization (i.e. generate > the necessary "source" files when you save your document). I will have a look. This might take some time, though. It's not that I hate Scheme, or something. I can read and write Scheme (even though I have not worked on a project with it) and I think it is a very elegant language. It's just that I am having a hard time reading and understanding TeXmacs' API. > 3) The handling of TeXmacs comments in source files should be > very easy to implement. Something like > > /* TeXmacs 1.0.5.7 markup > .... > end TeXmacs markup */ > > would probably be a good marker in the case of C/C++ files. Can the string "*/" appear in TeXmacs markup? > 4) For the roadmap after version 1.1, I plan to include an internal > linking mechanism based on tree obervers. This should be very robust > and completely outdate the current linking/referencing mechanism, > mutators and the Proclus plug-in. Also this will allow you to think > of documents as graphs rather than trees. However, I have no idea when > I will have time. That is very good news. Given this plan for tree observers, I will put my plans for clones on hold for the time being. I understand that tree observers may be a long way off, but I think that focusing on an easy literate serialization mechanism may gain the most. If I, at some point, think I need clones ASAP I can still start implementing them as an intermediate solution. > 5) Independently from me, I think that it would be good to develop > a "TeXmacs file system" as suggested a month or so ago on this list. > This should be done in a server based way and the development can be > done quite independently from TeXmacs itself (Felix: I do strongly > recommend the use of Scheme). I think that such a file system would > be of a great help for litterate programming too: it basically > would consider the file system to be a big document. That is a great idea. I have been thinking about something like this myself after reading an article on 9P (the Plan 9 protocol). Can you point me to the relevant posting? I had a look but couldn't find that email. Thanks, Felix _______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
