From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: [PATCH] * lisp/ob-core.el (org-babel-execute-src-block): insert hash for silent results Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:09:45 -0700 Message-ID: <877glhsfus.fsf@gmail.com> References: <1362542863-25992-1-git-send-email-aaronecay@gmail.com> <87obetsgma.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47255) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE5UT-0005X6-Vc for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:10:18 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE5UO-00081r-HN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:10:13 -0500 Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com ([209.85.160.44]:58651) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UE5UO-00081S-BN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 17:10:08 -0500 Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id wz12so1657758pbc.3 for ; Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:10:07 -0800 (PST) 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: Achim Gratz Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Achim Gratz writes: > Aaron Ecay writes: >> In order for the cache feature to work, the hash of a finished >> computation must be inserted. But, this is not currently done for src >> blocks which have the option :results none. Thus, we should insert a >> dummy empty result for these blocks, which will hold the hash. > > Getting a results block when specifying ":results none" feels a bit > strange. I would agree. I don't believe *any* changes should take place in the buffer when a code block is executed with ":results none". > Since it is not the results that are hashed, but the effective > parameters of the invocation, wouldn't it make more sense to store the > parameter hash with the source block or call rather than the result? > That would free up the current place to hash the actual result to > check if the results have been tampered with. > I prefer leaving the hash with the results, as it is the results which are "hashed". Also, same input does not always guarantee same output, e.g., #+begin_src sh date #+end_src > > > Regards, > Achim. -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte