leo-editor VS org-parser

What are your experiences with literate programming for handover of code?

I am thinking of tools like noweb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noweb), LEO (http://leoeditor.com/) org-mode (http://cachestocaches.com/2018/6/org-literate-programming/), scribble/lp2 (https://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/lp.html#%28part._scribble_lp2_.Language%29),

My experience so far is that it can be a fantastic tool for documenting and handing over complex algorithms to successor developers. I use extensively use ersonal wikis (sometimes MoinMoin, sometimes Zim Wiki, in the last time often a combination of github with reStructuredText) for work. That might also be sufficient when handing over boring code.

I know what folding is, that's just not what I want. I want to completely hide everything that is not related to the current function. For a while, I used http://leoeditor.com/ where I could have every function/method as a node in a tree, with the node body containing just that. Looking for a way to achieve the same in vim if possible.

The lack of good node/graph based APIs for Org Mode is my beef as well. When you compare it with the APIs of the Leo Editor[1], Org pales in comparison. Manipulation that is trivial in the Leo Editor can be quite a pain in Org mode.

[1] https://leoeditor.com/

> What outliners do you know which allow end-users to feed their data into formulas for processing it without using general-purpose programming languages?

Bit of a pointless constraint, the talk is about outliners, not no-code-datamangment. Which tool today does this even offer on a useful level?

But you can look at leo editor (https://leoeditor.com), which is active for 20+ years, fully scriptable and extendable. Though, it's a hot piece of garbage for laymen. It's offers a bunch of features and plugins even for non-coders, but I'm not sure it would satisfy you for this area, if you can't code.

But I'm not sure if there ever is a tool which will satisfy everyone with just a no-code-approach.

Hmm maybe you mean:

- Programming based on fragments, not documents (e.g. LEO https://leoeditor.com/)

- Live programming (e.g. smalltalk environments)

- ... where certain actions are not available, e.g. a PL geared towards speech recognition may not support "hover"

There's also https://leoeditor.com/ where you can have a tree of nodes and execute any of them.

I had this problem until I found an editor that had outlining as it's core design paradigm. Now, with the outline always visible, it's _really_ easy to navigate any length file.

Unfortunately, at one point I got so used to navigating with the outline that I ended up making a 1500 line function in C (I was an even worse C programmer then than I am now). Because of the outline, I could read and follow it easily, but anyone with a different editor was royally screwed :-(

If you're interested, the editor is LEO (http://leoeditor.com/) it's been mentioned on HN a few times

Let me start by saying I like the goal and would like to see org mode accessible to everyone, but I do have some thoughts/reservations.

> For the little code I do write, I find having AI assistance (via CoPilot or Cody) to be tremendously helpful. So helpful, in fact, that I now tend to jump into VSCode for actual coding,

Aren't there both copilot and Cody plugins available in emacs?

> Use VSCode for everything. For me, this requires a full-featured org mode implementation. I currently feel stuck in Emacs just because of how great org mode is.

This seems much more difficult than creating plugins you need in emacs and with the downside that customization will be much worse in vscode, especially customization of behavior with things like hooks.

> Letting go of bug-for-bug compatibility with Emacs as a goal. Let's let the quirky behavior die off and move forward with a more cohesive program, even if it looks a little bit different.

If you don't have compatibility, then you aren't really implementing org-mode... you are starting fresh.

That's okay, but you'll likely annoy org-mode users and developers as documents ending in `.org` start not working the same.

Also there are languages besides Rust and Haskell that have an org parser implementation. For instance one written in Javascript already has a spec as you explain it and is used in production for organice[0]:

> Why is this project useful / Rationale

> Org mode in Emacs is implemented in org-element.el (API documentation). The spec for the Org syntax is written in prose. - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

> Portable. It should not be difficult to get this integrated into any editor.

This tells me you already have a language in mind such as Lua (can't think of any other easy to integrate languages)? I'd argue that's not very popular either though.

0: https://organice.200ok.ch/

I mean , you have parsers for JS and CLJS https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

I don't think you did. You probably used the sister project https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser which has a well known issue regarding what you are describing: https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/issues/56

organice has no such performance issues (and does not run on the JVM). I use it daily with 5k LOC files.

EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

From the readme:

> Org grammar for tree-sitter. It is not meant to implement emacs' orgmode parser, but to implement a grammar that can usefully parse org files to be used in neovim and any library that uses tree-sitter parsers.

This grammar is in active development and is being used by nvim-orgmode/orgmode [1], a org-mode neovim plugin.

Some additional resources some might find useful:

* Org Syntax - https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html

* EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

[1] https://github.com/nvim-orgmode/orgmode

There's at least a parser using that as a spec at https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

We have an issue with more information and we are working on it: https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/issues/56

If you’re open to use a different Lisp, then maybe https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser is something for you.

I just wanted to chime in and mention that the folks who wrote organice[0] also came up with an EBNF grammar[1] for org-mode. Also of tangential interest is that work is actively being done on creating a tree-sitter version[2] of the grammar, although that work is not public (yet).

[0] https://github.com/200ok-ch/organice

[1] https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

[2] https://github.com/kristijanhusak/orgmode.nvim/issues/31#iss...