My very rough prototype in fact does allow that - and indeed it was one of
the trickiest (and most
interesting) aspects of the development.
An important question I want to address in a formal study is to determine
if such editing is advisable or
will it turn out to be more likely to introduce errors.
One option would be to disallow multiple invocations. In fact I'd really
like to get an idea of how important
multiple invocation is in current LP usage. I also wonder how this relates
to aspect oriented programming.
Another option is to disallow editing of tangled code in sections that are
multiply invoked.
One colleague is even nervous about editing of tangled code at all given
that you are now editing out of the context
of the surrounding documentation. I of course think it can work with proper
warning/support from the tool.

At 10:57 PM 12/1/2002 +0000, you wrote:
>If you edit the content of such a macro via the
>tangled sources, it will have to cause multiple simultaneous changes in the
>tangled files. Not impossible to do, but probably not trivial either.

Charlie McDowell, Professor (831) 459-4772 (w)
Computer Science Department (831) 427-2076 (h)
University of California (831) 459-4829 (fax)
School of Engineering http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~charlie
1156 High Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95064-1077