From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: [Bug] [babel] calls in :noexport: subtrees evaluated Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 10:40:27 -0600 Message-ID: <87r4qgqr2i.fsf@gmx.com> References: <87ipbtc5q0.fsf@med.uni-goettingen.de> <80y5ko3cko.fsf@somewhere.org> <87zk54ejc4.fsf@gmail.com> <80zk541m1j.fsf@somewhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53480) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9K4X-0004no-8Q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:11:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9K4W-0004El-0S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:11:29 -0400 Received: from mailout-us.gmx.com ([74.208.5.67]:39163 helo=mailout-us.mail.com) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T9K4V-0004Eh-QG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:11:27 -0400 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 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain "Sebastien Vauban" writes: > Hi Nicolas, > > Nicolas Goaziou wrote: >> "Sebastien Vauban" writes: >>> In fact, what you expect is that putting a tag ":noexport:" on a subtree would >>> propagate the option ":eval no-export"[1] to all code blocks beneath it. That's >>> the one which inhibits code block evaluation during export (but allow >>> interactive evaluation). >>> >>> I really don't have any strong opinion about this, even if, without further >>> thinking, I'd favor the same behavior as the one you expected. >> >> To answer the OP, :noexport: tag is related to export, not to >> src-blocks. There are already other ways to disable code evaluation on >> subtrees. It may be useful, as in your case, to have their behaviour >> linked, but again, sometimes not. >> >> It's often better to keep separate things, well, separate. > > To see whether there is more weigh toward a solution or the other, I would > formulate the question this way: > > are there real use-cases where one would want to *not* export a subtree > (by tagging it), though to *well* evaluate the code blocks it contains? > --=-=-= Content-Type: text/x-org Content-Disposition: inline; filename=example.org #+Title: Example Results in heading [[#first]] are generated by un-exported code blocks in heading [[#second]]. * first :PROPERTIES: :CUSTOM_ID: first :END: Things my adviser cares about. #+RESULTS: foo : like some result: 3 * second :noexport: :PROPERTIES: :CUSTOM_ID: second :END: Things my adviser does not care about, but which I need to keep, like minutiae of generating the result. #+Name: bar - foo - bar - baz #+Name: foo #+begin_src sh :var bar=bar echo "like some result: $(echo $bar|wc -w)" #+end_src --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte --=-=-=--