Re: [9fans] noweb and literal programming

[Chad Brown <yandros@MIT.EDU>]

I believe that Cweb/Ctangle were `engineering tradeoffs' -- i.e.
concessions to the large number of people who didn't care about the
theory or the practice of programming and just wanted to use TeX
(mostly AMSTeX) on whatever new system their math/physics department
happened to buy that year.

On Apr 10, 2009, at 4:50 PM, J.R. Mauro wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com
> > 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
>>
>
> Just curious... what's the relation to Cweb and Ctangle (the ones
> Knuth uses)?
>
> From what I've heard of those (even from Knuth himself) is that
> they're too ugly to use very much, and fits well with Knuth's style,
> which is mostly the "giant blob of code" style.