Hi Eric,
thanx ! That explains very clearly what I have seen, when trying to debug this
phaenomenon.
So this behaviour is by design and I can work around :-)
kind regards, Marc
Am 30.01.2012 17:10, schrieb Eric Schulte:
Marc-Oliver Ihm writes:
Am 29.01.2012 11:42, schrieb Andreas Leha:
Marc-Oliver Ihm writes:
> Am 29.01.2012 11:42, schrieb Andreas Leha:
>> :colnames yes
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Thanx, that is definitely a solution !
>
> And I agree with you, that its a bit puzzling, that both cases behave
> differently;
> the #+call-line should just have the same result as the #+begi
Am 29.01.2012 11:42, schrieb Andreas Leha:
:colnames yes
Hi Andreas,
Thanx, that is definitely a solution !
And I agree with you, that its a bit puzzling, that both cases behave
differently;
the #+call-line should just have the same result as the #+begin_src-line, to
which after all
it just
Marc-Oliver Ihm writes:
> Hello !
>
> Generally enjoying babel very much, I have stumbled across a behaviour, that
> I do not quite understand:
> As it seems, a #+call in babel removes hlines from the results.
>
> Here is an example:
>
> #+call: foo()
> | 3 | 4 |
> #+name: foo
> #+begin_src emac
Hello !
Generally enjoying babel very much, I have stumbled across a behaviour, that I
do not quite understand:
As it seems, a #+call in babel removes hlines from the results.
Here is an example:
#+call: foo()
| 3 | 4 |
#+name: foo
#+begin_src emacs-lisp
'((1 2) hline (3 4))
#+end_src
#+resu
