I should probably confess to having this in my .emacs files: ;; language specific headers. I think this comes before the defaults (setq org-babel-default-header-args:emacs-lisp (cons '(:results . "value replace") (assq-delete-all :results org-babel-default-header-args))) ;; set default :results to output (setq org-babel-default-header-args (cons '(:results . "output replace") (assq-delete-all :results org-babel-default-header-args))) ;; set default exports to both code and results (setq org-babel-default-header-args (cons '(:exports . "both") (assq-delete-all :exports org-babel-default-header-args))) These things change the default behaviors for the results. I almost always want output as results, and not value (the regular default), except when coding in emacs-lisp where the value make sense to me. That would certainly be a point of confusion ;) I also find you want :results output raw if you are printing a table or printing org. This is something I have never found satisfying, especially for long tables or outputs it is tedious to have to delete the old output by hand before rerunning it. I have not found any other sets of options that do what I want, e.g. changing raw to org results in the section being wrapped in #+begin_org/end_org, which is usually not what I want. I usually do want the raw output. I hope that clarifies where some of your differences might be coming from. John ----------------------------------- John Kitchin Associate Professor Doherty Hall A207F Department of Chemical Engineering Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 412-268-7803 http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:18 PM, Martin Schöön wrote: > This is my first post here... > > I have been using org-mode as a pure TODO-tool for some time but this > winter I realised it could be used for much more and I have been > experimenting with mixing in LaTeX and Python for fun and because I find > literate programming a particularly sane idea (I am a HW engineer). > > Less than I week ago I started to look into using tables for input and > output to/from Python scripts. I was inspired by something I found at > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu/ . The enclosed example 1 file is a > pruned version of the org-file I found there. If I run the embedded Python > script using C-c C-c I don't get the table shown in the example. Instead I > get "none" on the row following "#+RESULTS:" > > If I change ":results raw" to ":results output" I do get the table but > 'wrapped' in "#+begin_example" and "#+end_example" as shown in the > enclosed example 2 file. I have done some further testing/changes in that > file (adding some stuff to the top of the file and changing the formatting > of the print statements) none of which changed the extra wrapping of the > table. When I export to LaTeX -> PDF the table does not show up in the > end result. > > Let's move over to the third example file and the real mystery. This all > my own code. Reading data from the first table works just fine and the same > goes for the calculations. The output table, however, is different from > that of example 2. The 'wrapper' is gone but each row is starting with ": > ". Where does that come from? Why does it differ from example 2? If my > results differ from someone else's (different install/versions etc) -- > OK. But how can I get differences like this on my own? To my un-trained > eyes the print statements of examples 2 and 3 look very similar. (But, the > first things that go blind are the eyes... probably something blatantly > obvious once pointed out to me.) > > OS: #! Linux (Based on Debian stable, 64-bit) > Emacs: 23.4.1 > Org-mode: 8.2.5h > Python: 2.7.3 > > TIA, > -- > Martin Schöön > > http://hem.bredband.net/b262106/index.html >