Re: [RFC] Standardized code block keywords

[Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>]

> #+object_begin var
> x = 1
> y = 2
> #+end

I was thinking on similar lines. This together with Nicolas's suggestion
of "one name" will be wonderful.

I think it is easier to explain what I think by means of an example. In
case of lisp, the SAME variable name could either act as a function or a
variable. The way the VARIABLE NAME is INTERPRETED, DEPENDS ON THE
CONTEXT in which it needs to be interpreted. Similarly a VAR could be
EVALLED or just be a QUOTED SYMBOL.

Coming back to the above example -

If the HANDLE for the above block (whatever you call it), appears as a
PARAM OF BABEL CALL it would be interpreted as a param list. 

Think `apply' and `&rest args' in the elisp world.

Another near equivalent would be COERCING or CASTING. In abstract terms,
the above block could be treated as a TABLE. In some sense, a LIST or a
LIST OF LIST could be coerced in to a TABLE.

I consider babel to be a VM and an execution environment - i.e., as a
scripting environment for Org. So definitely we can borrow ideas from
the existing languages and extend it.

In summary, what I am saying is EVERYTHING IS A BLOB. The way a BLOB is
INTERPRETED depends on the CONTEXT in which interpretation happens. A
BLOB in and of itself is but JUST A BLOB and has NO INHERENT meaning.

I don't use babel myself so I may not be using the right set of
words. Also it is not my intention to hijack the thread.

Jambunathan K.