Re: [PATCH] Async evaluation in ob-shell

[Jack Kamm]

Matt <matt@excalamus.com> writes:

> Is this something you consider a bug?

Yes I think so. When I was testing ob-shell today I initially tried
with an M-x shell session, and I was surprised it didn't work.

But I also noticed another prompt-related issue: conda doesn't seem to
work in ob-shell sessions anymore. That is a bigger problem for my use
case.

>  > I believe this approach would be
>  > generally more robust, but the major weakness is that it would break if
>  > you SSH'd to a remote host in the middle of the session.

I guess, SSH doesn't work with the current implementation either.

This isn't a feature I need, but I have seen others make use of it in
the past, e.g. [1].

> Instead of writing to a temp file, it could use a here document.
> Here documents, AFAIK, are POSIX portable, although function
> definitions aren't.

That is a really neat idea.

Sadly, "conda activate" doesn't seem to work in here-documents :(

ob-shell is really tricky, with so many cases
(bash/zsh/fish/Windows/etc). Perhaps ob-shell could have a main
"batch-like" implementation (either here-documents, or source'ing
tempfile, or wrapper function), but also have a fallback line-by-line
implementation for certain edge cases?

[1] https://howardism.org/Technical/Emacs/literate-devops.html