Re: [BABEL][PATCH] ob-lilypond basic mode - was ob-lilypond

[Eric Schulte <schulte.eric@gmail.com>]

Hi Martyn,

I just applied this patch.

If you don't mind packaging future patches using the git format-patch
command that would be my preference, as it preserves author information
and allows you to write your own commit message.

Thanks! -- Eric

Martyn Jago <martyn.jago@btinternet.com> writes:

>    Hi
>
>    I've added functionality to make ob-lilypond act in a consistent
>    org-babel way by default (think ob-dot).
>
>    The previous modus operandi is now known as arrange-mode and is
>    selected by setting ly-arrange-mode to t
>
>    More details including examples are at
>    http://github.com/mjago/ob-lilypond
>
>    Patch:
>
>    Included examples are as follows...
>
>     - Export org file with lilypond fragments to pdf using eps (high
>    quality vector graphics)
>
>       - org
>    source: https://github.com/mjago/ob-lilypond/raw/master/examples/basic-
>    mode/pdf-example/pdf-example.org
>
>       - resultant
>    pdf: https://github.com/mjago/ob-lilypond/blob/master/examples/basic-mo
>    de/pdf-example/pdf-example.pdf?raw=true
>
>     - Export org file with lilypond fragments to html using png
>
>       - org
>    source: https://github.com/mjago/ob-lilypond/raw/master/examples/basic-
>    mode/html-example/html-example.org
>
>       - resultant
>    html: https://raw.github.com/mjago/ob-lilypond/master/examples/basic-mo
>    de/html-example/html-example.html
>
>    Regards
>
>    Martyn
>
>    On 1 Jul 2011, at 13:01, Christian Moe wrote:
>
>    On 6/30/11 8:10 PM, Eric Schulte wrote:
>
>      Martyn Jago<martyn.jago@btinternet.com>  writes:
>
>      (...)
>
>      Great, I've just moved this into the Org-mode core and added it to
>      the
>
>      list of Babel languages.
>
>    Great!
>
>      One distinction that has occurred to me (especially following
>      comments on
>
>      the mailing list) is that of "babel language" and "babel language
>      work-flow".
>
>      In other words, I can visualise refactoring ob-lilypond to be no
>      more than
>
>      a specification of the Lilypond syntax, and working in parallel, on
>      a
>
>      work-flow implementation for Lilypond that is "opinionated" in terms
>      of
>
>      adjusting org-babel settings away from their defaults / removing
>      work-flow
>
>      noise etc. ( org-lilypond.el ) ? Would this make sense, and if so
>      where would
>
>      it live (aligned to org-babel / a native Emacs mode perhaps)?
>
>      I hope that makes sense.
>
>      That sounds like a good idea.  Ideally ob-lilypond should include
>      just
>
>      those elements expected by the code block interface, namely
>      functions
>
>      for session/external evaluation, for expanding variables in code
>      block
>
>      bodies, and for returning results to Org-mode.  I think that it
>      would be
>
>      a good idea to develop an external org-lilypond to support a more
>
>      comprehensive workflow.
>
>    I like this.
>    I certainly see that the already complex task of making arrangements
>    like those in Martyn's examples should be made as easy as possible.
>    As for the comparatively simple use cases I brought up, once they're
>    supported by ob-lilypond I'd be perfectly happy to throw header
>    arguments at them.
>    Yours,
>    Christian

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/