Programming pearls: a literate program http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~nr/cs257/archive/don-knuth/pearls-1.pdf
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 10:49 PM, jaime <xiejianm...@gmail.com> wrote: > is there a place introducing (e.g. overview) more about Literate? have > no ideas about this stuff. > > On Oct 27, 3:06 am, d...@axiom-developer.org wrote: >> I see that my Literate Programming session is beginning to gain some >> traction. I would encourage you to bring examples. We can discuss the >> merits and possibly gain some new insights. If nothing else, please >> sign up for the Literate Software session at Clojure-Conj. I promise >> to keep it short. >> >> Literate programming can take various forms. I am working on a survey >> of literate software. I came across an interesting non-latex example >> worth sharing: >> >> http://jashkenas.github.com/coffee-script/documentation/docs/nodes.html >> >> Notice how well they have documented an apparently simple line as in: >> >> exports.Base = class Base >> >> The Base is an abstract base class for all nodes in the syntax tree. >> Each subclass implements the compileNode method, which performs the >> code generation for that node. To compile a node to JavaScript, call >> compile on it, which wraps compileNode in some generic extra smarts, >> to know when the generated code needs to be wrapping up in a >> closure. An options hash is passed and cloned throughout, containing >> information about the environment from higher in the tree (such as >> if a returned value is being requested by the surrounding function), >> information about the current scope, and indentation level. >> >> Notice how this is not only giving trivial information (e.g. Base is >> an abstract base class) but WHY it exists (..as a base for all nodes in >> the syntax tree). It gives operational information (to compile a node..) >> as well as information about the effect (..which wraps...). It shows >> how global information is used (An options hash..) and WHY (containing >> information about the environment...) >> >> Code only tells you HOW something is done at the time it is done. >> It's like having a recipe without an idea what you would make. >> >> If our standards of documentation were raised to this level then large >> systems like Axiom, Clojure, and ClojureScript would be much easier to >> maintain and modify in the long term. >> >> If you want your code to live beyond you, make it literate. >> >> Tim Daly >> d...@literatesoftware.com > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your > first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
