Re: [BUG] Consider replacing bachload with batch in ob-maxima. [9.6.6 (release_9.6.6 @ /usr/share/emacs/30.0.50/lisp/org/)]

[Vladimir Nikishkin]

Leo Butler <Leo.Butler@umanitoba.ca> writes:

> On Sat, Sep 02 2023, Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> wrote:
>
>> Lockywolf <for_org-bugs_2023-09-01@lockywolf.net> writes:
>>
>>> At the moment, ob-maxima has a straightforward way of evaluating
>>> babel blocks,
>>>
>>> #+begin_src shell
>>> maxima --very-quiet -r batchload\(\"/tmp/ob-maximaFOOBAR.mac\"\)\$
>>> #+end_src
>>> (line 87 of ob-maxima.el),
>>>
>>> I suggest replacing batchload with batch(), and changing line 73 from
>>> "gnuplot_close ()$" to      "gnuplot_close ()$ \nquit();"
>>>
>>> The difference between "batch" and "batchload" is that "batch" can
>>> process :lisp expressions in addition to maxima's own, and it prints
>>> input/output labels. However, it is possible to customise label printing
>>> from maxima's own code, and being able to evaluate :lisp just seems
>>> uncontrovercially good.
>>>
>>> It might be that I am missing something, but batch seems a better fit
>>> for Org-Babel.
>>
>> May you please explain more about :lisp expressions?
>
> This special syntax is not necessary. A recent change introduced the
> function `eval_string_lisp' that removes the need for it. I.e. one can
> batchload a file and execute lisp code inside a call to eval_string_lisp.
>

Well, necessary or not, but it existed for many years, and continues to
be a valid part of maxima so far. It is surprising for new users to not
see it working when quite a lot of howtos use it. (Especially the famous
pattern-matching howto from Michael Talon.)

Also, I would be hesitant to say that it "removes the need for it",
because a "valid expression" is not the same thing as a "string". In
particular, error processing should be different.

>>
>> Also, what is the benefit/downside of printing input/output labels? Is
>> there any chance they will be caught into the source block output? If
>> so, it would be a breaking change.
>
> Yes, his requests are breaking changes. That is why I suggested opening
> up the internals a bit so that one can alter the behavior while
> maintaining the same default.
>
> Leo

Well, this change is "breaking", in the sense that it would make the
output of ob-maxima be more consistent with what, say, imaxima is doing.
However, I thing that there is a way to make it non-breaking, by
prepending some maxima code which would make adjust maxima using "batch"
to have the same output as "batchload". Something like
src_maxima{programmode: true; nolabels: true;} should turn off labels
if that is desired.

But I would agree with Leo Butler that customisation is the best
solution here. Both "full batch", and "pseudo-interactive" modes are
useful.

-- 
Your sincerely,
Vladimir Nikishkin (MiEr, lockywolf)
(Laptop)