t...@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> Hi Seb,
>
> "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgw...@spammotel.com> writes:
>
>> Hi Thomas,
>>
>> Thomas S. Dye wrote:
>>> Is there a difference between :noweb tangle and :noweb no?
>>
>> Yes: ":noweb no" is the default, and must *not expand* anything.
>>
>>> Based on the documentation and some limited testing, I made the following
>>> table.
>>>
>>> *** :noweb parameters
>>>
>>> | param | eval | tangle | export |
>>> |--------+------+--------+--------|
>>> | yes | + | + | + |
>>> | no | - | + | - |
>>
>> It should be "-", "-", "-" here, if "-" means "no expansion".
>>
>
> Hmm, the manual entry for :noweb no says "However, noweb references will
> still be expanded during tangling." You're right, though, :noweb no
> doesn't expand noweb references during tangling. I'll work up a manual
> patch.
>
Great, I'll apply your documentation patch.
>
>
>>> | tangle | - | + | - |
>>> |--------+------+--------+--------|
>>> | need | + | + | - |
>>>
What should the name for such an option be?
>>>
>>> I think it might be good to have a parameter that expands noweb
>>>references on evaluation and tangling, but leaves them alone during
>>>export. This way the code block would be fully functional, but
>>>wouldn't duplicate code during export (when the noweb references are
>>>to other code blocks in the same document).
>>
>> I'd find that interesting as well, but then the names of the code blocks must
>> be visible again (in HTML and PDF exports), something that has disappeared
>> over time.
>
> Alternatively for LaTeX, some way to wrap exported code blocks in a
> \begin{listing} ... \end{listing} environment, complete with caption and
> label. This way the code block name could appear in the caption, and
> with \listoflistings, in the document frontmatter as well.
>
As I recall this was originally implemented and then later removed
because it was causing more confusion and problems than it was worth. I
hope it hasn't crossed the line of existence more than once. At some
point it should be placed behind a user-customizable variable,
preferably something like `org-babel-export-code-format' which defaults
to something like "%code" but could be augmented to something like
"Block Name: *%name*\n %code". It is not immediately clear if such a
variable should have different values for different export backends or
(likely preferable) should expand into Org-mode text *before* export.
Cheers,
>
>>
>> Find attached the 2 PDF I had written (in 2009) for comparing NoWeb's
>> rendering of blocks and Babel's rendering. See
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2009-12/msg00170.html.
>>
>> Some time after that, we had block names in the HTML/PDF output, but not
>> anymore.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Seb
>
> All the best,
> Tom
--
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/
