Re: [O] Limit on length of babel block #+name: value?
I can't replicate anymore, though I did just update Org. Perhaps I should have fiddled with it more before doing that... If it happens again, I'll dig into it. Thanks for double checking/attempting to replicate -- must be on my end. John On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Eric Schulte wrote: > John Hendy writes: > >> I was just completely baffled for about 5-10 straight minutes as to >> why my block was not producing a results section with my generated >> graphics file from an R block. >> >> I kept double checking my header options one by one despite having >> simply copied/pasted/modified it from a previous working block. Turns >> out it appears that #+name has a character limit! >> >> This (on Org-mode version 8.0.2 (release_8.0.2-65-g1e32d7)), doesn't work: >> >> #+name: improvement-treatment >> >> It appears the name can be 20 characters long (the above is 21). >> > > I don't think there is any name length limit. The attached example > works for me, and exports w/o problem to HTML. Maybe I'm not using the > block in the same way as you, but I'm pretty confident there is no name > limit and your problem probably lies elsewhere. > > > > Best, > >> >> Is this by design or something I accidentally uncovered? Forgive me if >> it's come up before or is documented. I did a couple searches but >> didn't see it. >> >> >> Thanks, >> John >> > > -- > Eric Schulte > http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte >
Re: [O] Limit on length of babel block #+name: value?
John Hendy writes: > I was just completely baffled for about 5-10 straight minutes as to > why my block was not producing a results section with my generated > graphics file from an R block. > > I kept double checking my header options one by one despite having > simply copied/pasted/modified it from a previous working block. Turns > out it appears that #+name has a character limit! > > This (on Org-mode version 8.0.2 (release_8.0.2-65-g1e32d7)), doesn't work: > > #+name: improvement-treatment > > It appears the name can be 20 characters long (the above is 21). > I don't think there is any name length limit. The attached example works for me, and exports w/o problem to HTML. Maybe I'm not using the block in the same way as you, but I'm pretty confident there is no name limit and your problem probably lies elsewhere. There is no name length limit #+name: improvement-treatment #+begin_src sh date #+end_src #+RESULTS: improvement-treatment : Thu May 16 06:04:20 MDT 2013 Calling this block. #+call: improvement-treatment() #+RESULTS: improvement-treatment() : Thu May 16 06:04:36 MDT 2013 and even longer #+name: improvement-treatment #+begin_src sh date #+end_src #+RESULTS: improvement-treatment : Thu May 16 06:05:04 MDT 2013 Calling this longer block. #+call: improvement-treatment() #+RESULTS: improvement-treatment() : Thu May 16 06:05:24 MDT 2013 Best, > > Is this by design or something I accidentally uncovered? Forgive me if > it's come up before or is documented. I did a couple searches but > didn't see it. > > > Thanks, > John > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
Re: [O] Limit on length of babel block #+name: value?
Hi, I cannot reproduce this on 8.0.2, at least not with the info provided. E.g., the following works fine: #+name: improvement-treatment #+begin_src R :results graphics :file test.png x <- 1:10 y <- x^2 plot(x, y) #+end_src #+RESULTS: improvement-treatment [[file:test.png]] So does any variation with an arbitrarily long string as NAME. Yours, Christian John Hendy writes: > I was just completely baffled for about 5-10 straight minutes as to > why my block was not producing a results section with my generated > graphics file from an R block. > > I kept double checking my header options one by one despite having > simply copied/pasted/modified it from a previous working block. Turns > out it appears that #+name has a character limit! > > This (on Org-mode version 8.0.2 (release_8.0.2-65-g1e32d7)), doesn't work: > > #+name: improvement-treatment > > It appears the name can be 20 characters long (the above is 21). > > Is this by design or something I accidentally uncovered? Forgive me if > it's come up before or is documented. I did a couple searches but > didn't see it. > > > Thanks, > John
