Rick Frankel <rick@rickster.com> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 04:35:31PM -0600, Leo Alekseyev wrote:
>> >> Therefore, when executing an entire buffer, there is no way to have
>> >> the execution of a call block dependent on the prior execution of a
>> >> source block.
>> >>
>> >
>> > It would be better to make the dependency explicit by passing the
>> > results of the call line as a (potentially unused) variable to the code
>> > block.  For example;
>> [snip]
>
> The problem w/ this is that the (potentially time consuming) dependent
> will be executed twice when doing a buffer eval.
>
>> > There is (at least currently) no guarantee that evaluation order will be
>> > buffer order.
>> 
>> Is there some deep rationale for the current behavior that I'm not
>> seeing?  Are there big obstacles to enforcing ligeral execution order?
>
> It's because prior to 7.8, call blocks were not executed during a
> buffer execute. The solution was to execute all the call blocks after
> executing the src block. (Eric would have to comment on how hard it
> would be to merge the two functions :).
>

Turns out it was not that difficult to change this behavior.  You and
Leo are both correct that in-buffer-order evaluation is more natural and
expected than the previous behavior.  I've just pushed up a fix after
which evaluating the following