The point of using links is to not transclude referenced chunks on the render, but only during the tangling process. Usually, you want to read literate code folded, but with an ability to jump quickly to included chunks.
среда, 11 мая 2016 г., 10:41:53 UTC+3 пользователь PMario написал: > > On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 9:30:54 AM UTC+2, Ruslan Prokopchuk wrote: >> >> Mario is right, \rules solution doesn't work well in my situation. I've >> spent entire morning playing with it, but decided to write custom parser: >> https://gist.github.com/ul/bdd6c6d6715b8ed36348304c973a91af >> Custom parser is better than custom widget because you not only get >> links, but proper reference handling, missing, orphans etc. >> > > Your literate programming approach is very interesting. > > If you use {{Included chunk name}} instead of [[Included chunk name]] it > should be possible to create tangled source output out of the box, with > some custom rendering templates. > > So your code snippet would look like this: > > ``` > function parentChunk() { > console.log("let's include another chunk below"); > {{Included chunk name}} > } > ``` > > > just some thoughts. > > -mario > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/4b62e0e6-a822-49d8-824e-182a49f831e7%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
