From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniele Pizzolli Subject: Re: [bug] Removing the Babel results Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 16:28:34 +0100 Message-ID: <86k2zzxbdp.fsf@me.localhost.invalid> References: <86bnlbxe90.fsf@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49599) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIfP8-0002ZV-65 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:28:43 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIfP4-00074e-UR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:28:42 -0500 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::196]:55681) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIfP4-00074D-Ol for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 10:28:38 -0500 Received: from mfilter8-d.gandi.net (mfilter8-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.137]) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00CAA1720B4 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 16:28:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]) by mfilter8-d.gandi.net (mfilter8-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rxa8-sYWnJuU for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 16:28:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost.invalid (unknown [193.206.22.97]) (Authenticated sender: me@toel.it) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 81050172070 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 16:28:35 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <86bnlbxe90.fsf@example.com> (Sebastien Vauban's message of "Tue, 03 Feb 2015 15:26:35 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello Sebastien, Sebastien Vauban writes: > Hello, > > Removing the Babel results (through `C-c C-v k') is not done in > a coherent way, as you can see in the following example: Nice to hear that I am not the only one to complaint. :-) I proposed a new function that preserve the placement of the result if you used named (keyword) block result, and hopefully does the right thing by default! Maybe this will help to get it merged or to continue the discussion and rearch some agreement. Feel free to comment at the previous thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2015-01/msg00797.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2015-01/msg00814.html Thanks, Daniele