|
|
@@ -232,6 +232,34 @@ Another example is in the [[*operations%20in%20on%20tables][grades example]].
|
|
|
** PROPOSED conversion between org-babel and noweb (e.g. .Rnw) format
|
|
|
I haven't thought about this properly. Just noting it down. What
|
|
|
Sweave uses is called "R noweb" (.Rnw).
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ I found a good description of noweb in the following article (see
|
|
|
+ the [[http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~nr/pubs/lpsimp.pdf][pdf]]).
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ I think there are two parts to noweb, the construction of
|
|
|
+ documentation and the extraction of source-code (with notangle).
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ *documentation*: org-mode handles all of our documentation needs in
|
|
|
+ a manner that I believe is superior to noweb.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ *source extraction* At this point I don't see anyone writing large
|
|
|
+ applications with 100% of the source code contained in org-babel
|
|
|
+ files, rather I see org-babel files containing things like
|
|
|
+ - notes with active code chunks
|
|
|
+ - interactive tutorials
|
|
|
+ - requirements documents with code running test suites
|
|
|
+ - and of course experimental reports with the code to run the
|
|
|
+ experiment, and perform analysis
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ Basically I think the scope of the programs written in org-babel
|
|
|
+ (at least initially) will be small enough that it wont require the
|
|
|
+ addition of a tangle type program to extract all of the source code
|
|
|
+ into a running application.
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ On the other hand, since we already have named blocks of source
|
|
|
+ code which reference other blocks on which they rely, this
|
|
|
+ shouldn't be too hard to implement either on our own, or possibly
|
|
|
+ relying on something like noweb/notangle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
** PROPOSED Create objects in top level (global) environment in R?
|
|
|
At the moment, objects created by computations performed in the
|
Eric Schulte