Revision history [back]

I don't know of any attempts to add an ob-sage.el. I maintain sage-mode and use org, but I use LaTeX to write papers so I haven't had a need (yet) for ob-sage. Coincidentally, there is a currently thread on the org list that talks about people having problems with persistent sessions with ob-python. There are three different python modes so it's not surprising that it doesn't work with all of them. You may wish to follow that thread and see if any fixes there resolve your problem.

I already have code in sage-mode to allow sage to work when exporting via latex, so I wouldn't mind adding ob-sage.el. I would suggest opening a ticket on bitbucket. Also, you can fork and open a pull request. If possible I would prefer to "hook into" ob-python rather than copy/paste/modify it, but such a thing may not be possible (or even desirable), I haven't looked. That way it will hopefully take advantage of improvements to ob-python. I think all that should need to change is the executable.

Or maybe a patch to ob-python to allow it to dynamically switch to Sage would be best. I don't know if such a change would be welcome in org, though I suspect it would. I have papers on file with the FSF so I can make such a change if desired.

I don't know of any attempts to add an ob-sage.el. I maintain sage-mode and use org, but I use LaTeX to write papers so I haven't had a need (yet) for ob-sage. Coincidentally, there is a currently thread on the org list that talks about people having problems with persistent sessions with ob-python. There are three different python modes so it's not surprising that it doesn't work with all of them. You may wish to follow that thread and see if any fixes there resolve your problem.

I already have code in sage-mode to allow sage to work when exporting via latex, so I wouldn't mind adding ob-sage.el. I would suggest opening a ticket on bitbucket. Also, you can fork and open a pull request. If possible I would prefer to "hook into" ob-python rather than copy/paste/modify it, but such a thing may not be possible (or even desirable), I haven't looked. That way it will hopefully take advantage of improvements to ob-python. I think all that should need to change is the executable.

Or maybe a patch to ob-python to allow it to dynamically switch to Sage would be best. I don't know if such a change would be welcome in org, though I suspect it would. I have papers on file with the FSF so I can make such a change if desired.

I don't know of any attempts to add an ob-sage.el. I maintain sage-mode and use org, but I use LaTeX to write papers so I haven't had a need (yet) for ob-sage. Coincidentally, there is a currently thread on the org list that talks about people having problems with persistent sessions with ob-python. There are three different python modes so it's not surprising that it doesn't work with all of them. You may wish to follow that thread and see if any fixes there resolve your problem.

I already have code in sage-mode to allow sage to work when exporting via latex, so I wouldn't mind adding ob-sage.el. I would suggest opening a ticket on bitbucket. Also, you can fork and open a pull request. If possible I would prefer to "hook into" ob-python rather than copy/paste/modify it, but such a thing may not be possible (or even desirable), I haven't looked. That way it will hopefully take advantage of improvements to ob-python. I think all that should need to change is the executable.

Or maybe a patch to ob-python to allow it to dynamically switch to Sage would be best. I don't know if such a change would be welcome in org, though I suspect it would. I have papers on file with the FSF so I can make such a change if desired.