From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: From: Chad Brown To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:48:54 -0700 Subject: Re: [9fans] noweb and literal programming Topicbox-Message-UUID: da0a6e66-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 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 > 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.