Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23/11/12 19:11, Jambunathan K wrote: > Rainer M Krug writes: > >> Hi >> >> I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a >> text as follow: >> >> #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 >> +x_0=0 +y_0=0 >> +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src >> >> Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. >> Is there a way >> that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but >> without the syntax >> highlighting? >> >> BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE >> >> is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. > > Marking the src block as `fundamental' has a drawback. One can no longer > have in-buffer > fontification of src blocks. But this only applies for this source block, for which no message is defined anyway and consequently no highlighting is usefull (at the moment)? Or do I miss something in your argument? Rainer > > A better option would be to have a custom variable which produces > black-and-white src blocks on > export. > > ODT already has this option. > > C-h v org-e-odt-fontify-srcblocks RET > > I am CCing Nicolas, to check whether he would be interested in introducing an > export knob for > this. > >> Thanks, Rainer > - -- Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology Stellenbosch University South Africa Tel : +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44 Cell: +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98 Fax : +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44 Fax (D):+49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44 email: rai...@krugs.de Skype: RMkrug -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlCyQWcACgkQoYgNqgF2egpqAgCeKL/mg3oqXZLHoCi2ijAkJW1L nCMAn0wJXsul485qXJsJ/gk3DuGfMq2u =9O5N -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25/11/12 16:37, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Rainer M Krug writes:
>
>> In a document, I have several source blocks with "real" code (i.e. bash and
>> R in this case)
>> Now I have one block, which is not really source code, but which is "kind
>> of" source code, in
>> my case a definition of a projection for a GIS project. Now I would like to
>> have this
>> definition of the projection displayed in the exported document as the other
>> source blocks,
>> If I put it into an EXAMPLE block, it is exported to LaTeX as verbatin and
>> not listing, and
>> all customisations ai have for listings (smaller font, grey background, ...)
>> do *not* apply
>> to the EXAMPLE block, but woyuld to a "fundamental" source block. So the
>> EXAMPLE block is in
>> this case not equivalent to the fundamental source block.
>>
>> Hope this clarifies the difference,
>
> Yes, thanks.
>
> Since you use "listings" package, can't you define a new language (i.e. with
> \lstdefinelanguage{pseudocode}) and then use "#+begin_src pseudocode" block?
Well - this does not seem to be necessary. If I use
#+begin_src fundamental
...
#+end_src
the block will be formated following the rules for "listings". Even if I use
#+begin_src BlaBlaBla
...
#+end_src
it does not produce an error message in LaTeX. Nice with fundamental: I can use
C-c ' to open the
block in a new buffer and edit it there - very handy.
If I would like to have some highlighting in the source block in the LaTeX
export, I obviously
would have to define a new language - nice idea actually for the final output.
Thanks,
Rainer
>
>
> Regards,
>
- --
Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology,
UCT), Dipl. Phys.
(Germany)
Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology
Stellenbosch University
South Africa
Tel : +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44
Cell: +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98
Fax : +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44
Fax (D):+49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44
email: rai...@krugs.de
Skype: RMkrug
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlCyQN8ACgkQoYgNqgF2egon2QCgi2XwZtHYDSvbUvp5OQm9/1sM
w3IAnj6qBems+qPepvahxB+GxKJMNONK
=UAoO
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Rainer M Krug writes:
> In a document, I have several source blocks with "real" code (i.e. bash and R
> in this case) Now I
> have one block, which is not really source code, but which is "kind of"
> source code, in my case a
> definition of a projection for a GIS project. Now I would like to have this
> definition of the
> projection displayed in the exported document as the other source blocks, If
> I put it into an
> EXAMPLE block, it is exported to LaTeX as verbatin and not listing, and all
> customisations ai have
> for listings (smaller font, grey background, ...) do *not* apply to the
> EXAMPLE block, but woyuld
> to a "fundamental" source block. So the EXAMPLE block is in this case not
> equivalent to the
> fundamental source block.
>
> Hope this clarifies the difference,
Yes, thanks.
Since you use "listings" package, can't you define a new language (i.e.
with \lstdefinelanguage{pseudocode}) and then use "#+begin_src
pseudocode" block?
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 25/11/12 01:28, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > Hello, > > Jambunathan K writes: > >> Rainer M Krug writes: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a >>> text as follow: >>> >>> #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 >>> +x_0=0 +y_0=0 >>> +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src >>> >>> Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is >>> missing. Is there a way >>> that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but >>> without the >>> syntax highlighting? >>> >>> BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE >>> >>> is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. >> >> Marking the src block as `fundamental' has a drawback. One can no longer >> have in-buffer >> fontification of src blocks. >> >> A better option would be to have a custom variable which produces >> black-and-white src blocks >> on export. >> >> ODT already has this option. >> >> C-h v org-e-odt-fontify-srcblocks RET >> >> I am CCing Nicolas, to check whether he would be interested in introducing >> an export knob for >> this. > > I still don't get what is wrong with example blocks (wrt export). Would > someone care to > elaborate? Yes. In a document, I have several source blocks with "real" code (i.e. bash and R in this case) Now I have one block, which is not really source code, but which is "kind of" source code, in my case a definition of a projection for a GIS project. Now I would like to have this definition of the projection displayed in the exported document as the other source blocks, If I put it into an EXAMPLE block, it is exported to LaTeX as verbatin and not listing, and all customisations ai have for listings (smaller font, grey background, ...) do *not* apply to the EXAMPLE block, but woyuld to a "fundamental" source block. So the EXAMPLE block is in this case not equivalent to the fundamental source block. Hope this clarifies the difference, Cheers, Rainer > > > Regards, > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlCyOSUACgkQoYgNqgF2egrxdACeKk1/9hvuGv4PGEj9EAXipjOK CW8An0KJAUM0ejDcy9n1Gq2jxEHkvmZp =oKbK -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Hello, Jambunathan K writes: > Rainer M Krug writes: > >> Hi >> >> I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a >> text as follow: >> >> #+BEGIN_src >> +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 >> +lat_2=-29.75 >> +lat_0=29 >> +lon_0=30.75 >> +x_0=0 >> +y_0=0 >> +datum=WGS84 >> +units=m >> +no_defs >> #+END_src >> >> Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. >> Is there a way that I >> can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but without >> the syntax highlighting? >> >> BEGIN_EXAMPLE >> END_EXAMPLE >> >> is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC >> blocks. > > Marking the src block as `fundamental' has a drawback. One can no > longer have in-buffer fontification of src blocks. > > A better option would be to have a custom variable which produces > black-and-white src blocks on export. > > ODT already has this option. > > C-h v org-e-odt-fontify-srcblocks RET > > I am CCing Nicolas, to check whether he would be interested in > introducing an export knob for this. I still don't get what is wrong with example blocks (wrt export). Would someone care to elaborate? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Rainer M Krug writes: > Hi > > I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a > text as follow: > > #+BEGIN_src > +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 > +lat_2=-29.75 > +lat_0=29 > +lon_0=30.75 > +x_0=0 > +y_0=0 > +datum=WGS84 > +units=m > +no_defs > #+END_src > > Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. > Is there a way that I > can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but without > the syntax highlighting? > > BEGIN_EXAMPLE > END_EXAMPLE > > is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC > blocks. Marking the src block as `fundamental' has a drawback. One can no longer have in-buffer fontification of src blocks. A better option would be to have a custom variable which produces black-and-white src blocks on export. ODT already has this option. C-h v org-e-odt-fontify-srcblocks RET I am CCing Nicolas, to check whether he would be interested in introducing an export knob for this. > Thanks, > Rainer --
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Rainer M Krug wrote: > On 23/11/12 16:02, Eric Schulte wrote: > > Rainer M Krug writes: > > > >> On 23/11/12 00:17, Eric Schulte wrote: > >>> Rainer M Krug writes: > >>> > Hi > > I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially > a text as > follow: > > #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 > +x_0=0 +y_0=0 > +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src > > Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is > missing. Is there a > way that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes > output but without > the syntax highlighting? > > BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE > > is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. > > >>> > >>> I bet "fundamental" would work, e.g., > >> > >> Yes, it does - works perfectly. Is this documented? > >> > > > > Yes. Whatever language string is placed at the top of the source block > > will define the mode > > used for export and in-block editing. I believe that is documented. > > OK - then I thought that I can use all languages *for formating* which are > defined in the listings > package in LaTeX, but it doesn't matter what I take: it always formats it in > as a source block but > obviously without syntax highlighting. > > For editing: C-c ' only works ehen using "fundamental" - other non-existent > languages are not > accepted (obviously). > > So I assume in org, there is support for "fundamental", but I could not find > it in the > documentation when I looked. > > At the moment, my org info documentation seems to be not accessible (blank > page when opening it). > In order for this to work, emacs has to have a mode to handle it: "fundamental" as a language works, because emacs has a mode called fundamental-mode. I append the relevant portion of the documentation (section 14.2, Editing source code) I hope it comes in useful until you get your info problems resolved, but note that it's also available online at http://orgmode.org/org.html#Editing-source-code See org-src-lang-modes below for the details: , | | 14.2 Editing source code | | | Use `C-c '' to edit the current code block. This brings up a language | major-mode edit buffer containing the body of the code block. Saving | this buffer will write the new contents back to the Org buffer. Use | `C-c '' again to exit. | |The `org-src-mode' minor mode will be active in the edit buffer. The | following variables can be used to configure the behavior of the edit | buffer. See also the customization group `org-edit-structure' for | further configuration options. | | `org-src-lang-modes' | If an Emacs major-mode named `-mode' exists, where `' | is the language named in the header line of the code block, then | the edit buffer will be placed in that major-mode. This variable | can be used to map arbitrary language names to existing major | modes. | | `org-src-window-setup' | Controls the way Emacs windows are rearranged when the edit buffer | is created. | | `org-src-preserve-indentation' | This variable is especially useful for tangling languages such as | Python, in which whitespace indentation in the output is critical. | | `org-src-ask-before-returning-to-edit-buffer' | By default, Org will ask before returning to an open edit buffer. | Set this variable to nil to switch without asking. | |To turn on native code fontification in the _Org_ buffer, configure | the variable `org-src-fontify-natively'. | ` HTH, Nick
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Rainer M Krug writes: > On 23/11/12 16:02, Eric Schulte wrote: >> Rainer M Krug writes: >> >>> On 23/11/12 00:17, Eric Schulte wrote: Rainer M Krug writes: > Hi > > I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a > text as > follow: > > #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 > +x_0=0 +y_0=0 > +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src > > Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is > missing. Is there a > way that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes > output but without > the syntax highlighting? > > BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE > > is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. > I bet "fundamental" would work, e.g., >>> >>> Yes, it does - works perfectly. Is this documented? >>> >> >> Yes. Whatever language string is placed at the top of the source block will >> define the mode >> used for export and in-block editing. I believe that is documented. > > OK - then I thought that I can use all languages *for formating* which are > defined in the listings > package in LaTeX, but it doesn't matter what I take: it always formats it in > as a source block but > obviously without syntax highlighting. > > For editing: C-c ' only works ehen using "fundamental" - other non-existent > languages are not > accepted (obviously). > > So I assume in org, there is support for "fundamental", but I could not find > it in the > documentation when I looked. > When editing a code block, Org-mode will take the name of the language, append "-mode", and then try to call the result as a function. So for example, an R code block will call "R-mode" to edit the contents using R-mode. Thus any *-mode is a valid code block name. > > At the moment, my org info documentation seems to be not accessible >(blank page when opening it). > > Cheers, > > Rainer > >> >> Cheers, >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Rainer >>> #+begin_src fundamental +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+end_src > > Thanks, > > Rainer >>> >> > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23/11/12 16:02, Eric Schulte wrote: > Rainer M Krug writes: > >> On 23/11/12 00:17, Eric Schulte wrote: >>> Rainer M Krug writes: >>> Hi I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a text as follow: #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. Is there a way that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but without the syntax highlighting? BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. >>> >>> I bet "fundamental" would work, e.g., >> >> Yes, it does - works perfectly. Is this documented? >> > > Yes. Whatever language string is placed at the top of the source block will > define the mode > used for export and in-block editing. I believe that is documented. OK - then I thought that I can use all languages *for formating* which are defined in the listings package in LaTeX, but it doesn't matter what I take: it always formats it in as a source block but obviously without syntax highlighting. For editing: C-c ' only works ehen using "fundamental" - other non-existent languages are not accepted (obviously). So I assume in org, there is support for "fundamental", but I could not find it in the documentation when I looked. At the moment, my org info documentation seems to be not accessible (blank page when opening it). Cheers, Rainer > > Cheers, > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Rainer >> >>> >>> #+begin_src fundamental +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 >>> +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 >>> +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+end_src >>> Thanks, Rainer >>> >> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlCvlaMACgkQoYgNqgF2egpgFgCeP7BZGpBUv1uU+tIzaFy4XvH5 C3gAn1ri7W9R4OJEKHq/RpVAELcFvpyM =Ezlp -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Rainer M Krug writes: > On 23/11/12 00:17, Eric Schulte wrote: >> Rainer M Krug writes: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a >>> text as follow: >>> >>> #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 >>> +x_0=0 +y_0=0 >>> +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src >>> >>> Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is >>> missing. Is there a way >>> that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but >>> without the syntax >>> highlighting? >>> >>> BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE >>> >>> is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. >>> >> >> I bet "fundamental" would work, e.g., > > Yes, it does - works perfectly. Is this documented? > Yes. Whatever language string is placed at the top of the source block will define the mode used for export and in-block editing. I believe that is documented. Cheers, > > Thanks, > > Rainer > >> >> #+begin_src fundamental +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 >> +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 >> +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+end_src >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Rainer >> > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23/11/12 00:17, Eric Schulte wrote: > Rainer M Krug writes: > >> Hi >> >> I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a >> text as follow: >> >> #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 >> +x_0=0 +y_0=0 >> +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src >> >> Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. >> Is there a way >> that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but >> without the syntax >> highlighting? >> >> BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE >> >> is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. >> > > I bet "fundamental" would work, e.g., Yes, it does - works perfectly. Is this documented? Thanks, Rainer > > #+begin_src fundamental +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 > +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 > +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+end_src > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Rainer > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlCvMSIACgkQoYgNqgF2egpKrQCdFYFJKZ/f7Ix+XOrO3sv2qpno wwoAnjz66rQYFBr0+Wr699pdrBx8aGT1 =NPZQ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
Rainer M Krug writes: > Hi > > I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a > text as follow: > > #+BEGIN_src > +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 > +lat_2=-29.75 > +lat_0=29 > +lon_0=30.75 > +x_0=0 > +y_0=0 > +datum=WGS84 > +units=m > +no_defs > #+END_src > > Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. > Is there a way that I > can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but without > the syntax highlighting? > > BEGIN_EXAMPLE > END_EXAMPLE > > is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. > I bet "fundamental" would work, e.g., #+begin_src fundamental +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+end_src > > Thanks, > > Rainer -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
[O] "Generic" Source block language specification?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi I have in a document a definition of a projection, which is essentially a text as follow: #+BEGIN_src +proj=aea +lat_1=-28.25 +lat_2=-29.75 +lat_0=29 +lon_0=30.75 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +datum=WGS84 +units=m +no_defs #+END_src Now this does obviously not export, as the source block language is missing. Is there a way that I can get the same formating of the source in the exportes output but without the syntax highlighting? BEGIN_EXAMPLE END_EXAMPLE is similar, but I would like the block to be formated as the SRC blocks. Thanks, Rainer - -- Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology Stellenbosch University South Africa Tel : +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44 Cell: +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98 Fax : +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44 Fax (D):+49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44 email: rai...@krugs.de Skype: RMkrug -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlCs4F8ACgkQoYgNqgF2egpPpACfXJXUHN58kG2geD0AfJXm0/uD yEQAnRQHlfgj5tZ5zjPNd1Bkt+JiDlP5 =rkEH -END PGP SIGNATURE-
