help-octave
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Publish


From: Juan Pablo Carbajal
Subject: Re: Publish
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 14:54:31 +0200

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 12:50 AM, siko1056 <address@hidden> wrote:
> Juan Pablo Carbajal-2 wrote
>> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 5:40 PM, siko1056 &lt;
>
>> k.ohlhus@
>
>> &gt; wrote:
>>> JuanPi wrote
>>>> On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 3:19 PM, JuanPi &lt;
>>>
>>>> ajuanpi@
>>>
>>>> &gt; wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Trying the function publish in 4.2.1 I get
>>>>>
>>>>> error: 'create_output' undefined near line 375 column 17
>>>>> error: called from
>>>>>     publish at line 375 column 15
>>>>>
>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>
>>>>> I was also wondering whether Kai's publish is already integrated in
>>>>> 4.2.1, if not, where do we get Kai's publish?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> JuanPi Carbajal
>>>>> https://goo.gl/ayiJzi
>>>>> Public GnuPG key: 9C5B72BF
>>>>> -----
>>>>> "Why is thought, being a secretion of the brain, more wonderful than
>>>>> gravity, a property of matter?"
>>>>> - C. Darwin
>>>>
>>>> it seems 4.2.1 is having troubles with subfunctions, because
>>>> create_output is there...
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> JuanPi Carbajal
>>>> https://goo.gl/ayiJzi
>>>> Public GnuPG key: 9C5B72BF
>>>> -----
>>>> "Why is thought, being a secretion of the brain, more wonderful than
>>>> gravity, a property of matter?"
>>>> - C. Darwin
>>>
>>> Hi JuanPi,
>>>
>>> Using a self-compiled Octave 4.2.1 on Linux, trying to publish this
>>> script
>>> https://github.com/siko1056/OctConf2017/blob/master/demo2/intro.m works
>>> as
>>> normal calling:
>>>
>>>>> publish ("intro.m")
>>> ans = /workspace/OctConf2017/demo2/html/intro.html
>>>
>>> Also subfunctions don't bother my 4.2.1 version... did you modify
>>> anything
>>> about publish or Octave? I'm very interested about getting this to work
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> Kai.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Publish-tp4683415p4683417.html
>>> Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Help-octave mailing list
>>>
>
>> Help-octave@
>
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-octave
>>
>> ok, found it!
>>
>> The issue is that the script being published cannot call
>>
>> clear all
>>
>> because it will delete the subfunction.
>>
>> Try it out
>>
>> ## A simple example
>> #
>> # This will break publish
>> #
>>
>> clear all
>> disp("Sad...")
>>
>> I did not find this documented, sorry. But I guess the script being
>> published should be run in its own workspace... no idea how to do that
>> or publish will have to comment out all the clear all and clear
>> functions...
>>
>> Also, need help with the markdown output or you already have it?
>
> Thank you for pointing me to this issue. For me, this is really worth a bug
> report! A fix (hack) would be to add a subfunction called clear at the very
> end of the file, just before the tests start at line: "## Bad function
> calls", see patch attached.
>
> I think at least a warning should be issued, to inform the publisher, that
> he should try to avoid using clear as long as bug
> https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?35881 is open.
>
> The other question about markdown support, that feature will be present in
> the next release, currently dev or 4.3.0+. An almost ready template is
> available from here:
> https://github.com/siko1056/OctConf2017/blob/master/demo2/__publish_jekyll_markdown_output__.m
> (One just needs to strip the Jekyll part).
>
> Best,
> Kai
>
> publish_clear.patch
> <http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/file/n4683437/publish_clear.patch>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Publish-tp4683415p4683437.html
> Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Help-octave mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-octave

Thanks Kai,

Ok, I opened a report.

If the hack works it looks fine as a temporary solution, maybe I would
link to the clear all bug, so that users detect faster when that bug
is closed.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]