Re: Mark and Tangle

From: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>
To: Eric Schulte <schulte.eric@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Mark and Tangle
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:30:47 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <81sk1kykv0.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 87occ9unq8.fsf@gmail.com

Let me explain what I mean by selective tangling (or any one of the
other babel operations)

I mark subtrees [1]. The nearest Org equivalent would be to create a
sparse tree with say a tag match and consider the visible portions as
selected or marked.

Then babel could choose to act on just the visible portion [2] as
opposed to the whole buffer (both visible and invisible).

It would be the responsibility of the user to make sure that visible
portions of the buffer form a coherent whole and babel's results
pipeline is not entirely broken.

Needless to say, selective 'babeling' is more expressive than 'babeling'
based on language or a set of languages or just a subtree. This is
because it could capture a user's complete workflow and editing
environment.

I believe the above request is consistent with org's way of doing
things [3]. 

As for the thread that you reference, I believe the solution is a bit
'nerdy' (if I may use the word) and relies on advanced knowledge (for
example, org's tagging apis, programming in elisp and fact that babel
plists could indeed be lisp forms) 

Footnotes:

[1] Marking as in emacs sense of the word. Think marking buffers,
marking gnus articles etc for later bulk action.

[2] That is, org-babel-do would hence forward take an additional
visibility-ok arguments. 

- Visibility need not be just that of a subtree but of any structural
  element.

- Modification of buffer due to insertion of #+results elements and
  their visibility could slightly complicate the implementation.

[3] As of today, I do consider babel's workflow (as a literate
programming environment) is orthogonal to Org's world view. Now that
babel is a first class entity within org-mode and emacs there is a
strong reason why this orthogonality should continue to be exist. 

Just my few cents here.

Jambunathan K.

"Eric Schulte" <schulte.eric@gmail.com> writes:

> I'm not sure if this exactly fits your needs, but see this recent
> related thread.
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/29401/focus=29482
>
> Best -- Eric
>
> Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> If there is support for marking (unmarking) headlines in org file it
>> could be quite useful.
>>
>> For example, selective tangling.
>>
>> Jambunathan K.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode