Re: [Axiom-developer] Pamphlet format discussion

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

address@hidden writes:

| Bill writes:
| >>> Integrating noweb into Axiom to support the current pamphlet file
| >>> format seems entirely reasonable to me. I think calling noweb as a
| >>> system supplied utility is the best approach
| 
| Tim writes:
| >> In the current system the result would be the same from the user
| >> perspective. In future planned use this would not be the case. Can
| >> you state in one or two sentences either your advocacy of noweb or
| >> your objection to native
| 
| Bill writes:
| > noweb exists, works as required and is maintained by someone else.
| > Rewriting basic tools is a waste of current and future resources. I
| > don't know what "future planned use" involves but in my opinion more
| > radical changes in literate programming philosophy are required than
| > can be accomplished by changes of this kind.
| 
| 
| 
| 
| So, two points then.
| 
| 1) "Rewriting basic tools is a waste of current and future resources."
| 
| The code already exists in the current silver to tangle pamphlet files
| using either noweb or latex format. The weave function already exists
| in a local version, enabling context-specific processing of pamphlets
| at runtime rather than as now, only at build time. For example, we could
| dynamically fetch partial content from a pamphlet in response to a 
| )help command.
| 
| There are no "current and future" resources. This is a volunteer effort
| and we only get to decide our own resource usage. Objecting to the use
| other people make of their time isn't a topic of debate.

The objection, as I understand it, is not to your spending your time
playing with your toy.   The objection as, I understand it, is against
having the common toy (Axiom) move to duplicating functionalities
(already provided by external tools) and having to maintain the source
code.  It is a waste of resource.

-- Gaby