Re: Org babel with multiple linked segments of source code

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

Hi,

The setup you suggest below is not currently supported.  I fear
implementing such a system could have some odd semantic extensions into
other parts of Org-mode code blocks, for example, would it then make
sense for the results of a code block to be collected over all code
blocks with that name?  For example,

#+source: test2
#+begin_src emacs-lisp
  1
#+end_src

#+source: test2
#+begin_src emacs-lisp
  2
#+end_src

#+begin_src emacs-lisp :var data=test2
  data
#+end_src

#+results:
| 1 | 2 |

Maybe, but this is certainly not possible under the current setup.

Anyways, back to your use case, maybe it would be equally convenient to
simply have a number of sequential code blocks in the Org-mode file all
tangle out, as they will be placed in the tangled file in the order they
appear in the Org-mode file, so your example below could be changed
to...

** tangling example
   :PROPERTIES:
   :tangle:   test1.clj
   :exports:  none
   :END:

#+begin_src clojure
  blah
#+end_src

#+begin_src clojure
  foo
#+end_src

#+begin_src clojure
  bar
#+end_src

#+begin_src clojure
  blah
#+end_src

While not the same as what you suggested this may be sufficient.

Best -- Eric

Nicholas Patrick <npatrick04@gmail.com> writes:

> I'm trying to figure out how to minimize the overhead with using babel to
> write some segments of code.  I find myself writing short segments of a set
> of functionality, then writing a collector source block which is referred to
> later on in the code... e.g.
>
> *********************
> #+srcname: test1
> #+begin_src clojure :tangle test1.clj :exports none :noweb yes
> blah
> <<test2>>
> blah
> #+end_src
>
> #+srcname: test2
> #+begin_src clojure
> foo
> #+end_src
>
> #+srcname: test2
> #+begin_src clojure
> bar
> #+end_src
> *********************
> I'd like to see
> blah
> foo
> bar
> blah
>
> but I see
> blah
> foo
> blah
>
> What I'd like to see is a single srcname for the code that just concatenates
> the two different sections when it is referred by <<descriptive-name>>.
> That way I don't have to come up with different names and collectors and so
> on and so forth.  Maybe I'm just not doing "literate programming" right, but
> when I'm hacking stuff together, I'd like to minimize the housekeeping.
> e.g.
>
> Is there a way to do this?