Dear thread participants, please note that we were breaking the rule of prepending the subject line with the string [babel]!
One question inline below. "Eric Schulte" <schulte.e...@gmail.com> writes: > "Thomas S. Dye" <t...@tsdye.com> writes: > >> On Oct 27, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Eric Schulte wrote: > >>> Although I still don't fully understand the need to embed latex >>> *inside* >>> of source-code blocks, perhaps the attached org-babel-latex.el file >>> [1] >>> will represent a simpler solution for embedding the results of >>> source-code blocks in latex source-code blocks. It makes use of >>> the :var org-babel header argument as shown in the attached example >>> file >>> [2]. To reproduce first load org-babel-latex.el and then evaluate the >>> latex block (note the results are already in the file from my test >>> evaluation). >>> >>> Hope this helps -- Eric >>> >>> Footnotes: >>> [1] <org-babel-latex.el> >>> [2] <latex.org> >> >> Thanks for this, Eric. It looks neat. I was happy with all the >> little .tex files, but agree with Torsten that this path is >> potentially cleaner. >> > > Please let me know if you do find this useful or have any suggestions. > If it proves useful I will add it to the org-mode repository. Am I right in thinking that one issue remaining in this thread is that we currently have no means of tangling the output of org-babel-latex? Thus the 'begin_src latex' blocks that we can tangle have unevaluated variables, and the resulting 'begin_latex' blocks have evaluated variables but can't be tangled? (We could extend tangling to cover such blocks, or perhaps preferably use ':results code' to generate 'begin_src latex' blocks?) Dan > >> >> In response to the implicit question in your comment, perhaps there >> isn't a need to embed LaTeX inside source blocks and the uses to which >> I put them could be accomplished in org-mode without them. My >> programming skills are pretty crude and I'm aware that I'm a long way >> from understanding org-mode and its vast potential. With that caveat, >> here is my $0.02. >> > > I'm also very far from taking full advantage of Org-mode export > >> >> First, practical reasons: >> >> 1) I'm comfortable writing LaTeX and am particular about the results; >> it is hard for me to map the inverse transformation through the org- >> mode LaTeX exporter to express in org the particular LaTeX result I'm >> after. >> >> 2) Someone on the list (Carsten?) mentioned a couple of days ago that >> it wasn't reasonable to expect the org LaTeX exporter to capture the >> full complexity of LaTeX (I'm paraphrasing, but I think that was the >> gist); I ran up against an example of this (or so I think) when trying >> to configure export to beamer code, where beamer's use of columns >> tripped me up. >> > > I fully understand your point. I guess that given my personal paucity > of latex knowledge and abilities the same need has never occurred to > me. In my case the Org-mode exported generally knows more about latex > than I do. > >> >> Second, conceptual reasons: >> >> 1) I consider writing LaTeX to be programming (here I mean no >> disrespect to real programmers) and appreciate being able to do >> literate LaTeX programming; the LaTeX source blocks let me write my >> beamer presentation a slide or two at a time, just as I want them, >> along with an adjacent source block for my print document, just as i >> want it, that covers the same conceptual space, while I use the >> surrounding org entries to document why I am doing things a particular >> way, etc. >> > > I see, you are using the org-mode file "a level above" the direct > export. Maybe another option here would be to tag headlines based on > which export target they are included within, and then base your exports > on the headline tags (using #+EXPORT_INCLUDE_TAGS:), although I agree > this also seems like an appropriate place to use the tangle > functionality. > >> >> 2) I think this workflow, with an org-mode meta-document that >> encapsulates the print document and presentation materials, along with >> the SQL, R, and Python code used to create the datasets and analyze >> them, takes org-babel a step closer to realizing its potential as a >> tool for reproducible research. Here, I am thinking of an org >> document that captures the ways in which a piece of research is one >> logical path among many possibilities, implemented and expressed in >> one particular way (or two, if you want to distinguish print from >> presentation) among many possibilities. >> >> The LaTeX source blocks in org-babel give me an easy and natural way >> to accomplish these things. In the short time I've used them, they've >> yielded results that impress me. I'm confident they hold much more >> potential than I've been able to tap. >> > > I didn't mean to imply that because I didn't understand the need for > direct inclusion of latex code there *wasn't* a need for direct > inclusion of latex code :) Thanks for the explanation. > >> >> It is a real pleasure leveraging your good work. >> > > It is a pleasure to be able to participate in such a nice open-source > community. -- Eric > >> >> Tom > > > _______________________________________________ > Emacs-orgmode mailing list > Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode _______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode