RE: [Axiom-developer] build-improvements and latex

[Bill Page]

> 
> > On 10/22/2006 12:42 AM, Bill Page wrote:
> >> You are right and the Makefile is wrong. Everything with extension
> >> .pamphlet should be processed by noweave before calling latex.
> > 
> > nope. that's not the case.
> >

????
 
> > noweb is just a preprocessing tool, not a requirement for 
> > literate programming.
> >

Well, yah. That's true.

 
> > there is no requirement (or intended requirement) that a .pamphlet
> > file implies running noweb. some of the files in any documented
> > axiom system will not contain code and will not need noweb. they
> > are, however, perfectly vaild .pamphlet files.
> >

Tim, that's just stupid. A .pamphlet file has to have a well defined
format or it's useless. Why not just call then .apple or .macintosh
files, then? ;)

I didn't mean *necessarily* noweb, but right now that is the best
definition we have of what a pamphlet file is.

On October 21, 2006 7:09 PM Ralf Hemmecke wrote: 
>  
> Please define the format of a .pamphlet file so that people can
> write tools to support that format. (If the format is moving,
> that is not a problem, but we should always have an up-to-date
> description of that format.)
> 

I agree. Or rather I would very much prefer to *define* .pamphlet
format as *exactly* the same as noweb format. That way we can
forget about it and do something more important then vaguely
trying to re-invent the wheel ... or something sort of round
that rolls and makes transportation easy ... whatever that
might be. ;)

> Up to now I thought the format is like the one in noweb, but
> already with your patch to noweb, you modified that. Without a 
> documented format we end up like SPAD is now. A language without
> formal specification. 
> Good luck.
> 

Good grief!

Regards,
Bill Page.