Re: [PATCH] Allow tangling to a list of files

[Jacopo De Simoi <wilderjds@protonmail.com>]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Wednesday, July 7th, 2021 at 7:28 PM, Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jacopo De Simoi jacopods@protonmail.com writes:
>
> > In fact the files are different, since each source block is tangled to a
> >
> > possibly different subset of files.
> >
> > The logic for which files to tangle according to which parameter or tags can be
> >
> > implemented by some lisp magic such as
> >
> > #+begin_src sh :tangle (filenames-according-to-situation)
> >
> > #+end_src
> >
> > So my patch provides the framework to do this, but the implementation is left
> >
> > to the author.
>
> This possibly makes your intention a little clearer.
>
> It seems to me that what you are asking for is not support for
>
> specifying a list of files, but support for specifying a function which
>
> will return the filename of the file to use for the tangled output? That
>
> is something I could see as being more useful than the ability to set a
>
> list of output filename. Things could be defined so that if the function
>
> returns nil, the block is not tangled, if it returns 't the block is
>
> tangled to the default output file and if the function returns a string,
>
> that string is interpreted as a filename which is to be used as the
>
> output target for the tangle.

This is (mostly) already in place, lisp is indeed evaluated as an argument of the : tangle argument (although the docs do not mention this fact).

 What my patch is providing is support for the case in which the function returns a list of filenames rather than just one filename (or yes or no)

The "(mostly)" above refer to the fact that 't is not processed correctly (but that would be an easy fix)

nil used to work before being broken by a recent commit.  I posted a patch on July 1 to address this issue, but it has not been considered yet.

>
> I think I might have seen another request for this type of functionality
>
> on the list recently? Such functionality seems like a useful addition.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Tim Cross