Matthew MacLean <archenoth@gmail.com> writes:

> Alright, done. Is this acceptable? (Provided that tests don't count towards
> line count, of course)

Thanks.  A few minor comments on the commit message.

> Subject: [PATCH] ob-ruby: Fix double-escaping
>
> * lisp/ob-ruby.el: Remove second call to
>   `org-babel-ruby-table-or-string' in `org-babel-ruby-evaluate'.

Please add the name of the changed function in parentheses after the
file name rather than putting it in the description body.

> * testing/lisp/test-ob-ruby.el: Add test to verify
>   `org-babel-execute:ruby' can evaluate Ruby code. (What the
>   double-escape prevented)

Same here for the test name.  "Add test." for description would do.

> I removed the escaping from `org-babel-ruby-evaluate', because the only
> place `org-babel-ruby-evaluate' is ever called is in
> `org-babel-execute:ruby'.
>
> In this function, its result either escaped (Where the double escape
> previously occurred) or passed in as the "scalar-form" of
> `org-babel-result-cond', which handles the "pp" and "code" parameters.
> (A place that doesn't need escaping.)

I think the above two paragraphs could be replaced by a link to this ML
post.

Thanks for working on this.

--
Kyle