[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Axiom-developer] \begin{chunk}

From: C Y
Subject: [Axiom-developer] \begin{chunk}
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 06:35:02 -0700 (PDT)

--- root <address@hidden> wrote:

> There are axiom-specific latex tags. This is likely to increase
> rather than decrease. This should be expected as we depend more
> on latex as our tool. For instance, I have an as-yet-unpublished 
> tag set that removes the use of
>   <<randomchunck>>=
> and replaces it with latex syntax
>   \begin{chunk}{randomchunk}

Tim, when do you plan to make this change?  I realize it can be
(almost) automated but it would be nice to have that style going
forward, if that's our final target.  I've been working with auctex and
mmm-mode trying to convince auctex to quit using code chunks when it
does its fontifying of the latex part of the document.  Also, if we use
\begin{chunk} mmm-mode (which handles the dual-mode part of things)
will need to be taught how to recognize the new environment.  (I know
you don't need or use these, but for us mortals they are kind of nice
;-).  If that change is coming soon I should probably focus on the
\begin{chunk} syntax (which is probably somewhat simpler to deal with

Also, one idea I want to mention now while there is still time to
consider it - would it be difficult to have an optional tag for a chunk
name identifying what language the code chunk is written in?  I ask
because for a number of applications (emacs mode mapping, syntax
highlighting in LaTeX using a package whose name escapes me at the
moment) it would be nice to know what language the chunk is.  Normally
a file is foo.lisp.pamphlet which works if all of the code chunks in
that file are lisp, but I know some pamphlets aren't like this.   Would
it be possible to specify a language (something like
\begin{chunk}{randomchunk}{boot} in a file.lisp.pamphlet file, for
example) so it is unambiguous and simple to determine how to deal with

> The axiom.sty is intended to ensure that we can correctly and
> consistently translate axiom pamphlet files. This is similar
> to the policy of places like the AMS or Universities creating
> their own style files.

I have to say I tend to agree with this one.  We can examine new
features as they are introduced and see what the impact would be in
including them with Axiom, but I think a layer if insulation between
Axiom and those changes is probably a good thing.


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]