From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: [RFC] Standardized code block keywords Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:25:07 -0600 Message-ID: <87fwim5muc.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87pqhrih3s.fsf@gmail.com> <30891.1319141196@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87fwinifqu.fsf@gmail.com> <32184.1319143892@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <808vofwf1w.fsf@somewhere.org> <87y5wfgwn7.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <80d3dqvjf9.fsf@somewhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:34284) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHHzJ-0007YE-30 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:30:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHHzD-0008Hf-NS for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:30:28 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.161.169]:59485) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RHHzD-0008Gf-Jq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:30:23 -0400 Received: by mail-gx0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h4so4680012ggn.0 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 09:30:23 -0700 (PDT) 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: Sebastien Vauban Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org "Sebastien Vauban" writes: > Hi Torsten, > > Torsten Wagner wrote: >> I tend to #+results: because it fits more to the entire babel syntax. >> However, earlier on the mailing list people were pointing out that one >> is going to change "results" for a unknown source block (that was the >> reason "data" was introduced).... and I think this is a valid >> argument. Maybe "data" and "results" should be both valid if only to >> pleasure human thinking. However, if I understood correctly, maybe >> data could be changed to be more some type of constant? That is, >> #+data: foo can not be changed by a source code block named foo >> (because it isn't a "result" but "data") but only by human (as a >> "data" input). Does this make sense? > > Yes, #+results are automatically generated by execution of some code. > > But, if you want to start with something, not generated, you had to insert > yourself a #+results block until the more logical #+data had been introduced. > > I like your explanation about the fact that such a manually-entered block is > "constant". > I like "constant" too, but the goals is to remove synonyms, not add them. :) Thanks -- Eric > > Best regards, > Seb -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/