From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rockefeller, Harry" Subject: RE: emacs IDE and org Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 15:05:21 -0500 Message-ID: <41DF74B043F8694186F5CC610060065F2295AA@srv060fssmx.ssd.fsi.com> References: <41DF74B043F8694186F5CC610060065F22935F@srv060fssmx.ssd.fsi.com> <3d6808890805090931o8c731d7u20a9344d0f5235f8@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JveGd-0000OB-MC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2008 16:05:03 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JveGd-0000Nz-5Z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2008 16:05:03 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58870 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JveGc-0000Nv-Q8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2008 16:05:02 -0400 Received: from mailgw02.flightsafety.com ([66.109.90.21]:58956) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JveGc-0007Bc-KZ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2008 16:05:02 -0400 Received: from mailgw02.flightsafety.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 4D2623B36 for ; Mon, 12 May 2008 16:04:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from srv060fssmx.ssd.fsi.com (unknown [192.168.77.6]) by mailgw02.flightsafety.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 108D138E7 for ; Mon, 12 May 2008 16:04:41 -0400 (EDT) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message In-Reply-To: <3d6808890805090931o8c731d7u20a9344d0f5235f8@mail.gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: org-mode mailing list I'm taking some time to brainstorm a bit. Yes, the thought I was expressing below using the QUOTE org syntax is something akin to literate programming. Using org for the simplicity of an ASCII formatting "language" where source code may be embedded in the actual org file. At our company, historically, we have a "suggested" documentation process which "requires" source to have special formatting characters along with comments so that it may be parsed to produce "documentation" - a kind of "literate programming" in reverse. Not only is this documentation not enforced, but often the code comments don't even match the fixes made to code over time. In other words, our corporate process could use some help. Also, now we are an ISO 9001 shop and have to pay closer attention to our software process. My personal process originated in the UNIX world where I continue using open source development tools: emacs "IDE" with svn for my personal repository vs the corporate tools which have migrated from UNIX to Micro$oft dev studio and VSS. I am comfortable using my personal software process but obviously a solution is for me to just conform. Nevertheless, our corporate software process is sketchy at best at the front end. Just naming a few items which project documentation may contain in a "note" if nothing else, would include: 1) Description, 2) requirements, 3) references, 4) design, 5) READMEs (HowTos), 6) ToDos, 7) Block diagram(s), and 8) Issues (problems and fixes for these problems). The nature of the project may dictate the necessity or importance of these. >From your brief statement below, Tim, I would imagine you would reference files of perhaps block diagrams, reference documents, and code via links inside of an org file which may directly contain descriptions, requirements, design, ToDos, and READMEs? A software repository would usually take care of the Issue details. Maybe I'm trying to jump to far ahead? This would be a good way to get my "feet wet" to begin by using org as a project "wrapper" file. In other words, begin using org by adding the stuff I think is important but have not yet written down and then linking my existing files together? Unless I hear something better from anyone else, I think I'll start with that. Just thinking out loud ... :-) > -----Original Message----- > From: = emacs-orgmode-bounces+harry.rockefeller=3Dflightsafety.com@gnu.org > [mailto:emacs-orgmode-bounces+harry.rockefeller=3Dflightsafety.com@gnu.or= g ] > On Behalf Of Tim O'Callaghan > Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 11:31 AM > To: org-mode mailing list > Subject: Re: [Orgmode] emacs IDE and org >=20 > 2008/5/9 Rockefeller, Harry : > > Is anyone using org mode in a software development process? An IDE, > emacs is > > no exception, assumes the source code is primary, having tools and > methods > > to edit source code files but not org files. org files, however, appear > to > > have all those other features desired in a development process: todo > items, > > requirements specifications, reference links, tabular and spreadsheet > data, > > etc. Export of various parts of the org file at different times of > > development may coincide with software process milestones. > > > > >=20 > I use Emacs for development, and have used Org to group together file > links and notes > for various projects. >=20 > > > > Org to source code seems straight forward via QUOTE, for example. From > > source to org may be set up using special 'org import' markers such as > > > > //* Top item > > > > // bla bla > > > > //** Sub item > > > > // bla bla > > > > where the cpp source comment character may get snipped off to use source > to > > generate an org file. Either the source or the org file may be primary. > Or > > maybe the org file is primary early in this process and eventually is > > replaced by source toward the end? > > >=20 > This sounds a bit like you want to use org for something like > "Literate Programming"? >=20 > Tim. >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > 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