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

[Ralf Hemmecke]

> 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.

Cool, I have never read this somewhere before. ;-)

> 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.

Wrong. For your definition, noweb is simply the wrong tool. Norman 
defined his format and where does he say that running noweb over a latex 
file should be the identity?

Anyway, I agree with Bill. We should take the noweb format and 
concentrate on other things until somebody comes and invests lots of 
time to

1) define a good pamphlet format and
2) provide convenient tools to handle this format.

Maybe noweb is not perfect. But it answers 1) and 2) pretty well. And 
seemingly most Axiom developers are happy with it.

If somebody comes forth and defines a new format (clearly that would be 
done in a .pamphlet file), then most developers would first have to 
agree that this is a better format. Then the format translation should 
be done *automatically*.

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

Tim, I think, you are contradicting yourself. You want us to explain 
everything and here the "just works" seems to be stronger than the 
literate document that explains why sometimes one must call noweb and 
sometimes not. BTW, the documentation of "/src/scripts/document" 
explains nothing and thus it does "not just work". It *always* applies 
noweave. ;-)

Ralf