Hello,
Ken Mankoff writes:
> On 2019-10-16 at 12:38 +02, Nicolas Goaziou wrote...
>
> Would you accept a documentation patch that defines the current
> behavior?
I don't know enough of the problem to answer. A default answer which in
neither "yes" or "no" is odd. Let's discuss it with other us
On 2019-10-16 at 12:38 +02, Nicolas Goaziou wrote...
> Of course, meawhile, do not rely on undefined behaviour :)
Would you accept a documentation patch that defines the current behavior?
Then I get what I want, and it is on future developers to not mess it up :).
-k.
Hello,
Ken Mankoff writes:
> Can you provide a more obvious hint? :)
I don't have enough time to help you more on that, sorry. I didn't even
look closely to the issue you're encountering. Hopefully, someone else
on the ML can provide guidance on it.
> I've read the documentation on called-inte
Hi Nicolas,
On 2019-10-16 at 12:38 +02, Nicolas Goaziou wrote...
> Note that what you want, i.e., to distinguish behaviour depending on
> the location of the call stack is cheesy, at best. Think about macros,
> user-defined functions, etc.
Yes, it felt a bit hackish. But I'm new to this level of
Hello,
Ken Mankoff writes:
> Hmm. So it turns out (I think) this patch isn't necessary. The
> behavior I wanted and thought I implemented is actually the default
> behavior! I think the behavior is undefined for :eval not equal to
> "yes", "no", or "query", but the current undefined implementati
On 2019-10-14 at 09:10 +02, Ken Mankoff wrote...
> With this patch and ":eval only-manual" in a babel header,
>
> Org evaluates the source code if it is run via ~org-ctrl-c-ctrl-c~
> (e.g. =C-c C-c= in the babel block), but not if run via the
> ~org-babel-execute-buffer~ function.
Hmm. So it tu
With this patch and ":eval only-manual" in a babel header,
Org evaluates the source code if it is run via ~org-ctrl-c-ctrl-c~ (e.g. =C-c
C-c= in the babel block), but not if run via the ~org-babel-execute-buffer~
function.
This is my first contribution to Org core. I've signed FSF papers.
