From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:29:40 +0100 Message-ID: <6a3ae47e0904111129t69adcd9dn851e83ef25bd2177@mail.gmail.com> From: Robert Raschke To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] noweb and literal programming Topicbox-Message-UUID: da306422-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 4/10/09, Rudolf Sykora wrote: > Hello, > > I've been thinking about 'well documented programs' and come across > the 'noweb' program. > Do you have any experience with literal programming and, particularly, > noweb? > (I noticed at least rsc seems to have played with it back in the year > 2000. He programmed some scripts to use the system in Plan9...) > > Thanks > Ruda > Over the years I have used CWEB, Spiderweb (pretty-print using your own rules), noweb, Funnelweb, and nuweb. Literate Programming suits the way I think when solving a problem. I tend to start programming a narrative, telling the story of the solution. These days I use mainly nuweb (small C program, very easy to customise to your own preferences) and html. LP is not for everyone. It is definitely not for someone used to work in a modern IDE. And it takes a bit of courage and conviction, if your working with other people. I use it mostly for smallish programs; one or two code files, <5000 lines of code. For example, scripted business logic for the integrtions I do at work. Larger stuff involving muliple modules usually involves more people, so the lowest common denominator wins. Nuweb should be easy to get running on Plan 9. Noweb is harder, since it depens on a lot of Unix scripts. Robby