3 Its a while since I contacted you, but I have got somewhere. I'm still working
4 on the version of noweb-mode.el that is distributed with noweb itself, but I'm
5 getting places. I've made it more reliable: moving text used to confuse it
6 horribly, but it shouldn't any more. And although I couldn't reproduce those
7 `hot icons' in your noweb-mode, I used the << and >> of the chunk name to do
10 I've also got tangling sorted. Well, it works for me. I haven't tested the
11 line numbering and tab-resetting options yet, but I can tangle chunks and
12 scraps (which I, recidivist that I am, refer to as threads: I can't help
13 thinking that a web woven from threads will be prettier than one woven from
14 scraps). Unfortunately, I couldn't see a reasonable way of breaking this out
15 of the noweb-mode package. So my tangling won't work with your noweb-mode,
16 you'll have to use mine. At least until you can incorporate the relevant
19 I've also got the beginnings of an ess-noweb.el. For example, `ess-eval-chunk'
20 simply runs `ess-eval-buffer' on the buffer that the chunk was tangled into.
21 I've been using it successfully for about a week now, although not for
22 anything particularly fancy. It adds the tangling options to the ESS menus,
23 but only makes them active if noweb-mode is active.
25 Here are the three relevant files (noweb-mode.el, noweb-font-lock-mode.el and
26 ess-noweb.el). Give them a spin and see what you think.
28 Wait up, you need my ess-site.el as well, cos that's were the menus are
36 Incidentally, you mentioned that you were keen on version control, and
37 preferred CVS to RCS. I'm trying to sort out version control on my stuff here
38 at the moment, but was not convinced at all by CVS: it does far too many
39 things that are not needed by a statistician. All the multiple developer stuff
40 should be superfluous for tracking data: one person should be responsible for
41 managing the file at any given time. So I'm going with a bare minimum
42 approach: RCS, and shell scripts to hide most of the options. Just check
43 things in, with automatic checking out so that the programs can always find
44 the data they need, snapshots, and restoring. All done with symbolic links, so
45 that the same files can be in several projects at the same time (RCS handles
46 symbolic links ABOMINABLY, but the shell scripts can get around this.) My
47 theory is that if the system is sufficiently simple, people *might* use it,
48 but anything that requires too much thought will be a non-starter. What
49 draw-backs do you see in this way of doing things ? Why would you do it