From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: suvayu ali <fatkasuvayu+linux@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Selective export of Babel code blocks Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 19:16:39 +0200 Message-ID: <CAMXnza0bU6R0ZyCeammSSkg8dH+cn3QaSJKP5CGCneBq4zuCMA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA+M2ft9Ye+ESjgoDZBfufP0_ZpMf9rt1oUbaUrHkT3LfsjaWmw@mail.gmail.com> <m1fw9sczpa.fsf@tsdye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org> Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43646) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <fatkasuvayu@gmail.com>) id 1SgfZa-0005X7-NX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 13:17:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <fatkasuvayu@gmail.com>) id 1SgfZV-0006Ga-V8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 13:17:06 -0400 Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:33132) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <fatkasuvayu@gmail.com>) id 1SgfZV-0006GM-Op for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 13:17:01 -0400 Received: by yenr5 with SMTP id r5so3919786yen.0 for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Mon, 18 Jun 2012 10:17:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <m1fw9sczpa.fsf@tsdye.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>, <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode> List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>, <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: "Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.com> Cc: emacs-orgmode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org> Hi Thomas, On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote: > #+CALL: clean-up() :exports none > > This way, the original code block will be exported and subsequent calls > should not be. I think John's use case requires other code blocks "using" the common code block. Can a "CALL" be done from inside a codeblock? That said, your post gave me an idea; how about defining a function in the first code block and then using that in the other blocks. This would require the session feature of course. :) -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.