That is understandable; they're big patches. I recommend going over ob-java first. Java is probably more familiar to you and ob-java and ob-haxe are very similar. These were mostly based on ob-python and ob-C. The tests are based on ob-Cs tests.
Look carefully at org-babel-temp-dir and org-babel-remove-temporary-directory. The patches override core but ideally these would be changes in core. I was hesitant to put these in ELPA because then the tests won't run when org-mode is modified. On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 12:56 AM Kyle Meyer <k...@kyleam.com> wrote: > ian martins writes: > > > I posted patches for ob-java and ob-haxe a couple months ago but there > was > > no interest. I have been given access to push to contrib. If there's no > > objection I'll put them there. > > > > I'll rename my version ob-java-alt so it doesn't conflict with the > official > > one. The contrib directory doesn't have a "testing" directory so I'll add > > one. I'll document them in worg. > > My understanding is that there's been a move away from adding new > libraries to contrib/, instead preferring an ELPA for cases where core > isn't deemed appropriate. > > Fixes and enhancements to ob-java are obviously appropriate for core. > And while it'd be fine to host ob-haxe separately, my impression is that > it too would be suitable for core. > > I'm sorry your patches haven't gotten any reviews or other feedback. > I've sat down a couple of times to review the ob-haxe patch but haven't > ended up blocking off enough time to get anywhere. I'll revisit it this > weekend. Of course, any feedback from those that actually use haxe > would be appreciated. > >
