[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Texmacs-dev] literate programming for TeXmacs
From: |
Felix Breuer |
Subject: |
Re: [Texmacs-dev] literate programming for TeXmacs |
Date: |
Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:33:51 +0000 |
Hello again,
and sorry for the long silence. Now:
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:38:29 +0100
David MENTRE <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello Joris and Felix,
>
> 2006/1/24, Joris van der Hoeven <address@hidden>:
> > On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 04:52:34AM +0000, Felix Breuer wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > OK, that is a variant of 1).
>
> Yes, I don't see much differences between the two approaches.
Well, perhaps there are none. :) See below.
> Otherwise I've read Felix specs and, as him, I'm in favor of a simple
> approach at first, i.e. 1) or 3). I'm not sure I've understood
> everything of the clone suggestion of Felix.
Well, as the clones idea has been officially postponed in favour of
Joris' tree obeserver concept, I won't try to elaborate right now.
> Felix, I do plan to work on this project, albeit not full time (I'm
> working on another free software project). I'm ready to do some
> development and tests.
Ditto. :)
> I don't know much of C++ and Scheme. However I know about OO concepts
> (but I'm bad at OO design) and I'm using OCaml (ML-like language) on a
> regular basis.
>
> Felix, how do you plan to do the development of this feature? Should
> we start by writting a short specification? Any idea of API/code to
> look at as a starting point?
1) Indeed, I think we should start by writing a short spec. Most
importantly to make sure that both of us have exactly the same thing
in mind when writing code. :)
2) I would propose to implement the whole thing in Scheme, for inclusion
in Scheme.
3) We could either create an export filter/serialization method, or
"override the standard load and save routines" as Joris suggested.
I think both methods differ only slightly, but I will have to dig
into the code before I see more clearly here.
4) I think using DRDs will also be of use. Perhaps we could use DRDs
to specify which nodes have verbatim content (i.e. content which should
be serialized verbatim).
5) I don't know when I have time to invest into this project. Perhaps
I will write up a quick draft of the spec monday evening for you to
change/comment on/extend. But I won't promise anything.
Regards,
Felix
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] literate programming for TeXmacs, (continued)
Re: [Texmacs-dev] literate programming for TeXmacs, Joris van der Hoeven, 2006/01/22