Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[H. Dieter Wilhelm]

Hello

I'd like to use an MSYS or MingW shell rather than the default shell
(com) for

#+begin_src sh
echo $SHELL
#+end_src



org-babel-shell-names

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[H. Dieter Wilhelm]

"H. Dieter Wilhelm" <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> Hello
>
> I'd like to use an MSYS or MingW shell rather than the default shell
> (com) for
>
> #+begin_src sh
> echo $SHELL
> #+end_src

I'm very sorry, accidentally I tried to run above block in message mode
instead of org-mode and send this unfinished question!

I now have

  (setq message-confirm-send t)

in my init file.

--
        Dieter

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

H. Dieter Wilhelm wrote:

> I now have
>
>   (setq message-confirm-send t)
>
> in my init file.

Beware often such things won't work because the brain and
fingers make one thing out of the two, so before one knows it
one will hit it like it is a key binding combination to any
other, one command ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[H. Dieter Wilhelm]

Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor
<help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> writes:

> H. Dieter Wilhelm wrote:
>
>> I now have
>>
>>   (setq message-confirm-send t)
>>
>> in my init file.
>
> Beware often such things won't work because the brain and
> fingers make one thing out of the two, so before one knows it
> one will hit it like it is a key binding combination to any
> other, one command ...

That is often true :-).  But I hope for actions where you didn't intent
to send a mail it will prevent to execute the mental confusion.

     Dieter

-- 
Best wishes
H. Dieter Wilhelm
Zwingenberg, Germany

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

H. Dieter Wilhelm wrote:

>> Beware often such things won't work because the brain and
>> fingers make one thing out of the two, so before one knows
>> it one will hit it like it is a key binding combination to
>> any other, one command ...
>
> That is often true :-). But I hope for actions where you
> didn't intent to send a mail it will prevent to execute the
> mental confusion.

The intention is to produce

  do thing 1
  (pause for brain to think)
  do thing 2 (confirm thing 1)

but your brain/body is more clever than that! I'm not always
so intelligent actually so I think I'd have to do that at
least 5 times before it would be

  do thing 1 + 2

even up here.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "H. Dieter Wilhelm" <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de>
> Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 21:37:25 +0100
> 
> Hello
> 
> I'd like to use an MSYS or MingW shell rather than the default shell
> (com) for
> 
> #+begin_src sh
> echo $SHELL
> #+end_src

See explicit-shell-file-name (assuming that Org heeds that variable).
But beware: futzing with that variable might get you in trouble
elsewhere!

In general, I'd say people who publish such blocks that assume a Posix
shell are to blame, not your Emacs setup.  I find such blocks
frequently posted without a lot of thought, just because it "WFM".

Qlisp for Quantum Computers (was: Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows)

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> #+begin_src sh
>> echo $SHELL
>> #+end_src
>
> [...] In general, I'd say people who publish such blocks
> that assume a Posix shell are to blame, not your Emacs
> setup. I find such blocks frequently posted without a lot of
> thought, just because it "WFM".

WFM = Workforce management?
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workforce_management>

So that's why those blocks are so silly ...

Hey, don't they say enterprise software is the most
challenging software one can write?
<https://www.techinasia.com/talk/enterprise-software-hardest-software>

Don't you use VB 5.0 for that? Or Cobol ... from 1959.

Maybe CL and Elisp should add support for Quantum Computers
BTW ... I just got this to work after a lot of fiddling:

  http://tph.tuwien.ac.at/~oemer/qcl.html

Now when we write 1997 and realize that the industrial epoch
finally draws to a close ... and various flavors of
"industriromantik" is all we have left:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbWLvwE8zfw

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Qlisp for Quantum Computers (was: Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows)

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

For some reason I can't find the post [1] but it/I said, in
part:

  Maybe CL and Elisp should add support for Quantum Computers
  BTW ... I just got this to work after a lot of fiddling:
 
    http://tph.tuwien.ac.at/~oemer/qcl.html

And here it is! Q-Lisp!

  http://www.schloerconsulting.com/quantum-computer-q-lisp-programming-language

:)

That Qlisp (or QLISP [2]) reference was meant as a joke! (not
the footnote) But see, never underestimate CL! (not QCL)

Let's call it QL then!

So QCL is based on C, Qlisp (QLISP) is Qlisp
but Q-Lisp is based on CL ... QL! qwl!

[1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnu-emacs/2022-02/msg00098.html
[2] https://www.sri.com/publication/qlisp-a-language-for-the-interactive-development-of-complex-systems/

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Qlisp for Quantum Computers (was: Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows)

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

> And here it is! Q-Lisp!
>
>   http://www.schloerconsulting.com/quantum-computer-q-lisp-programming-language
>
> :)

I still think we should do Qelisp ... and the name for qwlness
only, since it wouldn't be a new or independent language.
But the simulator OTOH ;) Maybe there is one and one can just
interface with that ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Qlisp for Quantum Computers (was: Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows)

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

But they call Q-Lisp "QLisp"

  The new language (QLisp) is an extension of the AI language
  ‘Common Lisp’ [1]

so QCL (not even Lisp) != Q-Lisp (based on CL, or as they put
it, ‘Common Lisp’) == QLisp != Qlisp == QLISP ...

Qould be qonfusing ...

[1] http://www.schloerconsulting.com/quantum-computer-q-lisp-programming-language

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[H. Dieter Wilhelm]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: "H. Dieter Wilhelm" <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de>
>> Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 21:37:25 +0100
>> 
>> Hello
>> 
>> I'd like to use an MSYS or MingW shell rather than the default shell
>> (com) for
>> 
>> #+begin_src sh
>> echo $SHELL
>> #+end_src
>
> See explicit-shell-file-name (assuming that Org heeds that variable).
> But beware: futzing with that variable might get you in trouble
> elsewhere!

Yeah it seems so.  That was the first idea I tried and it bit hard my
LaTeX exporting from org-mode. :-(

But I think it should be possible to specify a different shell only for
certain source blocks.  Please consider the customisation variable

   org-babel-shell-names => ("sh" "bash" "zsh" "fish" "csh" "ash" "dash"
   "ksh" "mksh" "posh")

it is possible to modify (amend?) the list of shells but I just can't
find where and how to "define" such a new "shell".

By the way

  #+begin_src shell
  echo $0
  #+end_src

seems to call MS com but

  #+begin_src sh
  echo $0
  #+end_src

an MSYS2 shell /usr/bin/sh...

> In general, I'd say people who publish such blocks that assume a Posix
> shell are to blame, not your Emacs setup.  I find such blocks
> frequently posted without a lot of thought, just because it "WFM".

Probably, I don't want to publish the blocks.  They are intended as a
mixture of documentation for myself and automated scripting for building
Emacs.

Thank you for your interest

  Dieter
-- 
Best wishes
H. Dieter Wilhelm
Zwingenberg, Germany

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "H. Dieter Wilhelm" <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 14:15:08 +0100
> 
> But I think it should be possible to specify a different shell only for
> certain source blocks.

Specify how? in Lisp? that's already possible, by binding
shell-file-name and shell-command-switch (assuming that the commands
use those and not hard-code stuff).

If you mean interactively, please talk to the Org folks, who are
responsible for the proliferation of these blocks -- the
implementation is in Org, AFAIU.

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> If you mean interactively, please talk to the Org folks, who
> are responsible for the proliferation of these blocks -- the
> implementation is in Org, AFAIU.

Don't do it or just type it ...

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Org-mode shell SRC block under Windows

[H. Dieter Wilhelm]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: "H. Dieter Wilhelm" <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de>
>> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2022 14:15:08 +0100
>> 
>> But I think it should be possible to specify a different shell only for
>> certain source blocks.
>
> Specify how? in Lisp? that's already possible, by binding
> shell-file-name and shell-command-switch (assuming that the commands
> use those and not hard-code stuff).
>
> If you mean interactively, please talk to the Org folks, who are
> responsible for the proliferation of these blocks -- the
> implementation is in Org, AFAIU.

I asked the org mailing list, if the outcome will be helpful I'll report
it here.

Thanks
        Dieter

-- 
Best wishes
H. Dieter Wilhelm
Zwingenberg, Germany