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

[root]

> |                      The question of what is a valid pamphlet
> | file requires definition, not standardization.
> 
> In this specific case, from my perspective, that is the same thing.
> People need to communicate and they need to agree on a protocol.
> The protocol can and should evolve, but there needs to be agreement on
> what is what.  Otherwise, we'll be lost in a 30-light-year deep black hole.

So if straight latex is the base case of a valid literate pamphlet file 
(since it contains 0 lines of code) then we have a working definition.

There are many ways to implement that definition, maybe use the latex
command directly or fix noweb to stop mangling latex.  noweb applied
to a pamphlet file which does not use noweb should be the identity
function.

noweb has a bug, not a feature.

or make the document command "just work" and do the right thing,
calling noweb only when required.




look to the future. what happens when someone drag-and-drops a
latex file onto axiom that describes a piece of research about
axiom but contains no code? do we mangle it? or do we "just work"?
this is a very likely case for the near future as most research
papers of interest won't contain code yet.




noweb was chosen by me as a simple, language neutral tool that would
achieve the FIRST step of literate programming. there was no intention
of claiming that it was in any way vital or final.

the essense of literate programming can be done without noweb. 

restricting our definition of literate programming to require that we
work on the apt-get version of a non-essential tool which fails to
work properly in the base case seems to me to limit ourselves to a
trivial, broken case of literate programming.

tools limit what you can think.
think, then shape the tools.

t