Forward: Stephen Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > I like the '@' > > > > So you're proposing yet another syntax? Non-noweb, non-latex? > > How would it work? What are the advantages/disadvantages. > > I believe you already have a good idea of the concepts involved here. > Your trying to do the same thing but using LaTeX syntax. That would > be fine with me if it were not for the fact that it is not, > conceptually, pure LaTeX. > > I would propose that we use a variant of noweb syntax to start. > Perhaps replace <<chunk>>= and the corresponding reference <<chunk>> > with @<chunk@>= and @<chunk@> respectively. These are less likely > candidates for collision with program constructs. > > As far as what other escape terms we could introduce with the @ > convention, that is open to wide debate. The spadcommand notion is a > good example of one thing we can do. > > The distinct advantage here is that we are using a syntax which is > special to a pamphlet. We need a weave stage, and we need an > unambiguous notation which we can accurately parse and transform. > Using latex syntax is ambiguous. Thats the main advantage, but a big > one with real technical advantages. > > > Steve
_______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
