François Pinard <pin...@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > poporg has many flaws, and is surely not up to the quality of Org. > Nevertheless, I much use it even if imperfect, while knowing it should > be improved in many ways.
same here on the outorg site, although I'm pretty sure its more alpha-stage. but since it is based on such a simple idea (-> design outline-regexp and outline-level in a way that applying 'comment-region' and 'uncomment-region' to each line does the conversion job between Org and whatever programming-language syntax) I hope a few bug-fixes and improvements will move it closer towards version 1.0. > If we could make something better out of two imperfections, it could be > worth trying. If only I had more time! Sigh! after a quick look at your code I would say that outorg and poporg are very different beasts - the effort to merge them would probably be much higher than to bring them both (independently) to a stable usable state. I will do some major changes motivated by this threat, maybe afterwards it easier to see where the similarities and where the differences are. -- cheers, Thorsten
