From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jambunathan K Subject: Re: Mark and Tangle Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:30:47 +0530 Message-ID: <81sk1kykv0.fsf@gmail.com> References: <81vd6l1w9b.fsf@gmail.com> <87occ9unq8.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58017 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OtBLG-0000aH-Hg for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 23:29:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OtBL9-0003rc-Tn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 23:28:53 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f41.google.com ([209.85.210.41]:44672) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OtBL9-0003rP-PK for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 23:28:51 -0400 Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33so3916676pzk.0 for ; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 20:28:50 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Eric Schulte Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org 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" 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 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