From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: [PATCH] Process hlines in imported tables Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:25:19 -0600 Message-ID: <87mwszhl0y.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20130329014615.GA49671@BigDog.local> <87wqsq6yd1.fsf@gmail.com> <20130329214238.GA53401@BigDog.local> <87r4ixah7y.fsf@gmail.com> <20130330234151.GA53721@BigDog.local> <87mwtkqtzh.fsf@gmail.com> <20130331122900.GA57939@BigDog.local> <87vc83bhma.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <867gkiz99z.fsf@somewhere.org> <87mwtepce2.fsf@gmail.com> <866202ko2q.fsf@somewhere.org> <868v4keyeb.fsf@somewhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44662) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URlK4-0007iA-A4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:28:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URlK2-0002rw-5U for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:28:00 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.220.44]:47525) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1URlK1-0002qy-L1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 11:27:57 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id bi5so2610024pad.31 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:27:56 -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 Eric, > > "Sebastien Vauban" wrote: >> Eric Schulte wrote: >>> I would agree that this (meaning raw implies scalar) should either occur >>> for all languages or for none. >> >> I think this is something interesting, but I wonder now if we wouldn't loose >> more than we would win. I mean: how would one be able to output a real "raw" >> result, then, that is one where pipes are not interpreted as table field >> separator which have to be aligned in some specific way. >> >> Do we need another argument for that? >> >> I mean: at the end, raw should really be raw (no interpretation). If we want >> some cycling for table alignment purpose (BTW, do you have lots of such code >> blocks?), maybe it'd be better to introduce a `cycle' argument or so? > > I think that this portion of my post has been ignored in your answers -- which > I still have to carefully look at. > > Though, I don't think the above question should stay unanswered: if you now > "cycle" on all "raw" results, how do we insert real "raw" results for which we > don't want any interpretation (not even cycling tables, or what you be > confounded as tables)? > Is this a hypothetical problem or do you have a use case which requires non-cycling? -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte