Re: Writing .el files for org in org?

[Rainer M Krug <Rainer@krugs.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1863 bytes --]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Rainer M Krug <Rainer@krugs.de> writes:
>
>> So I would argue that in ob-LANGUAGE.el files the non-elisp-expert is more
>> likely to look and work then in the core org files wherefore an
>> a more familiar interface for these changes (literate programming in
>> org) would provide more advantages then in the org-core files.
>
> But there is still the first and main problem that Aaron pointed to.

Just to make my point clear: I would not see the .org file as the one
which is used when using org, but as the one which is used to 

1) understand what is going on, i.e. include more detailed explanations
of what the functions are doing, what they are returning, possibly some
callcharts of the functions --- just everything to really understand
what is going on and why these things are done as they are. In other
words: follow the paradigm of literate programming.

2) which is tangled to generate the ob-....el file

3) which then can be debugged as usual

4) and if it is working, detangled into ob-....org

I must stress this comes from somebody not familiar with to much
emacs-lisp, but very familiar with R and Pascal (long time ago) and some
working C knowledge.

So the reason why I think it would be advantageous to have these files
in org does not lie with the programmer familiar with emacs-lisp, but
with somebody familiar with the other side.

Cheers,

Rainer

-- 
Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany)

Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology
Stellenbosch University
South Africa

Tel :       +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44
Cell:       +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98
Fax :       +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44

Fax (D):    +49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44

email:      Rainer@krugs.de

Skype:      RMkrug

PGP: 0x0F52F982

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 494 bytes --]