Re: BEGIN_SRC..END_SRC

[Eric Schulte <eric.schulte@gmx.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1500 bytes --]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> writes:
>
>>  > We don't want to bother with MIME for short snippets.
>>
>> Then what do you think your MUA is there for?
>
> The support for embedding small snippets via MIME is dicey in some mail
> readers, last time I looked.  They present(ed) the first textual part as
> the only visible text, and presented the rest as attachments.

To contribute to the bikeshedding [1], I've composed an example email in
gnus with inline Org-mode-syntax code, inline mime-annotated code, and
attached (disposition=inline) code.  The results as displayed by gnus,
gmail and gmx are shown [2].  I don't know if gnus should limit itself
based on the limitations of non-standards-compliant commercial software,
but at the least it would seem that while the mime approach /should/ be
the most portable it will in fact not be portable to many (maybe most)
other MUAs.

Since the only non-mime option is some sort of inline markup, although I
personally don't mind the Org-mode syntax, I also like the indentation
based suggestion as shown here.

    ;; -*- emacs-lisp -*-
    (defun foo () "bar" :baz)

The only question there being how often would indented non-code be
accidentally interpreted by gnus as code?  Also, this solution is
potentially more Emacs-specific than the existing Org-mode syntax.  The
following (attached disposition=inline) elisp works as an initial
implementation of this behavior on my system.


[-- Attachment #2: indented-code.el --]
[-- Type: application/emacs-lisp, Size: 1020 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 128 bytes --]


Best,

Footnotes: 
[1]  http://bikeshed.com/

[2]  http://i.imgur.com/FBA53.png

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/