-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improvement: make #+transclude
interface identical to #+include
#184
Comments
#+transclude
interface identical to #+include
There was a discussion along a similar line #83 I am still not really fixed on the current syntax, though if we were to change it, it would have to be mindful of the backward compatiblity -- meaning, we would have to support both the current API and the File path
Or you can have spaces in file names (I don't know if this is a valid c file name for compilation, etc. but I hope you'd get my point #+include: src/this is a c source file.c src C Line range
I am no developer. What I want to specify is this "Transclude the content from line 6 to line 10". That should be "6-10". I don't find "6-11" intuitive in this case -- that may be natural for developers who are familiar with algorithms, but for natural languages, that to me is very anti-intuitive. I developed this package originally for writing a book, so pretty much targeted at natural language use. :src property
I actually do not understand why "src" is special. It's a property to me. Other properties start with a colon ":", and I believe it's conventional for Emacs Lisp writers to use it to denote a In fact this is from the user manual on Include: #+INCLUDE: "./paper.org::#theory" :only-contents t #+INCLUDE: "~/.emacs" :lines "10-"
Lastly...These are just my current thinking. Open to change, or adapt if that is useful. |
What?
Consider a org document using the
#+include
directive:In order to move to org-transclusion, it must be adapted to:
org-transclusion is almost using the same syntax as
#+include
with the following diff (in that example):src
->:src
Of course, I am not aware of all the constraints that led to the current
#+transclude
interface, but let me ask the question:#+transclude
to follow the current interface of#+include
?It would be better to migrate to the transclusion package by just making a string replacement from
#+include
to#+transclude
. And make sure that#+transclude
behaves exactly the the same way as#+include
.I would be curious to know your thinking about it.
Thank you!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: