Achim Gratz <strom...@nexgo.de> writes: > Eric Schulte <schulte.e...@gmail.com> writes: > >> append the bodies of all blocks of the same name are appended >> during tangling > > Shouldn't this be called "concat(enate)" or "collate"?
I think "append" is just as clear as concatenate, and collate implies shuffling which is not happening. > Or, since several blocks with the same name seem a bit dubious, would > it not be cleaner to have an index part to the block name and a range > expression for the concatenation during tangling? I might want to > tangle them in different order than their appearance in the source, > for instance. > I'm wary of adding too much duplicate functionality. It is already possible to organize the tangling of many named code blocks using noweb reference expansion (a feature which I've used myself on real projects in the past). This existing method allows for unique block names and for arbitrary tangling order. Simplicity is the only reason that the new name-based appending behavior was implemented, simplicity which (in my opinion) is lost when the user defines a naming and sorting schema. Cheers -- Eric > > > Achim. -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/
