Talk:Literate programming

message: As noticed by 206.47.249.252, the source code listed is not quite C, as promised to the syntax highlighter. It's unlikely the highlighter will ever support something like lang="noweb#c", so it may be best to just use "<pre>" or custom formatting instead. But the former looks plain and the latter is labor intensive...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daggerbox (talk • contribs) 02:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Syntax Highlighting? 

message: The article would be improved if it contained a list of software programs that have been written in a literate programming style. From what I gather, this is still a small number, so a list would not be out of place. I know of TeX (which was even published as a book TeX: The Program) and METAFONT by Knuth, and I've heard about Axiom, but are there any ("big") programs or software projects written in literate programming? 59.92.198.129 (talk) 07:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. I glanced at the official discussion group for Literate Programming, which is now a Google Group. These discussions might be useful to read, in order to gain further insight regarding your question, and corresponding inclusion in the article, What is the future of literate programming? (July 2011) and Is Literate Programming useful? (March 2011). Note that comp.programming.literate has been active through October 2012. --FeralOink (talk) 15:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

text: Yes, many "notebooks" implement literate programming in Mathematica, Python, etc. But I have not seen the credit to Don Knuth, they just present it as a feature inducing to people to think it is their invention by not calling it literate programming with the respective credit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:106E:B:C6E9:BC25:52AF:2868:251 (talk) 12:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who uses literate programming? 

message: Literate programming is almost a standard approach in scientific computing decades and now in data science too. 
--mcyp (talk) 02:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literate programming practices 

message: Nothing here to make clear what action to take in nearly a year so removed. Please replace if you can give specfics. 72.228.189.184 (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed tagging. 

message: I updated external references but tried to include external links in my revision comment. Guess what: It didn't work!
This is what my edit was: I revised URLs due to the transition of EHC content to UHC per the UHC Wiki Project News, (Sept 2010). I also removed red link/ non-existent wikilinks. Also, I updated and cited properly, the Web68 reference. --FeralOink (talk) 14:41, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  EHC/ UHC and Web68 update 

message: Project Jupyter should probably be added to the list of examples.
* IPython#Project Jupyter
* https://speakerdeck.com/fperez/project-jupyter
Best wishes.  RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 22:50, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: this is added long time ago along with R. --mcyp (talk) 02:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Jupyter needs adding 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Literate programming. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820091137/http://sunburn.stanford.edu/~knuth/programs.html to http://sunburn.stanford.edu/~knuth/programs.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:28, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Just an amplification or clarification of what the existing section says.
Disclaimer:  I am neither a Wikipedia editor nor a professional programmer.  But this section triggered my memory of reading the McIlroy article many years ago.
McIlroy's wonderful metaphor "industrial-strength Fabergé egg" is a critique of the algorithm Knuth chose for his example, and not at all a critique of Literate Programming (which McIlroy praises).  He criticizes the use of a complex algorithm for a problem which has a much simpler solution.  And he criticizes the unnecessary use of a complex data structure, but he praises the data structure itself.  (He does also criticize some small details of the actual presentation of the algorithm in the Literate Programming example, but not the use of Literate Programming.)
Dudley Brooks (talk) 18:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A comment on the "Critique" section. 

message: Given the context, I'd expect the title of the "Latex" section to make slightly more sense as "LaTeX", but I'm still not sure it's supposed to have anything to do with this TeX format.  Can anyone shed some light on the matter? Splibubay (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Latex" section 

message: Where says:
:Literate programming is a programming paradigm introduced by Donald Knuth in which a computer program is given an explanation of its logic in a natural language, such as English, interspersed with snippets of macros and traditional source code, from which compilable source code can be generated.
Should say:
:Literate programming is a programming style introduced by Donald Knuth in which a computer program has code embedded with in a text explanation about the problem solving and design decisions that were taken into account in the writing of code. Literate programming express the logic in a natural language, such as English, different but not excluding the derivation of code from formal specification languages. The use of natural language has the allows the programmer to do more introspection on the domain problem. A literate program looks like a well written physics book, where some phenomenon is described in natural language and translated into mathematical notation deriving the laws in question, a literate program derives a piece of code. A literate program is more maintainable than those programs with only "self-documented" code with sparse comments, because it is very hard to understand what the program does to a programmer new to the problem domain, because that knowledge is not written explicitly in the code. 
:Any good programming style enforce the idea that code should be understandable for humans, not just for machines. As mentioned before a literate program has snippets of macros and traditional source code, interspersed within the explaining text, from which compilable source code can be generated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2806:106E:B:C6E9:BC25:52AF:2868:251 (talk) 11:08, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No, *Literate* programming it is not just a style, but an actual paradigm, since you start from the human prose that describes the code that you want to write and "tangle" produces the machine-readable code.  The major point is that code is not just embedded in text, but the main structure (= order) follows the textual description rather than plain code. Eli Barzilay 11:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literate Programming is an Style NOT a Paradigm 

message: Could the MATLAB Live Script be considered literate programming? Does it matter if the file is a binary format?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.241.0.254 (talk) 20:37, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add MATLAB Live Script? 

message: I think like at every other table involving softwares on wikipedia, this table should have licenses too? Yashpalgoyal1304 (talk) 05:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: inspired from Comparison of TeX editors, and using the table in this article; I have created a draft here: Comparison of Literate and Interactive Programming Tools. After that page is published with sufficient details, this article can be modified to contain only a summary of the table. Yashpalgoyal1304 (talk) 16:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Column for Licences of LP tools?