From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:31:29 +0200 Message-ID: <80hb2xtla6.fsf@somewhere.org> References: <87pqhrih3s.fsf@gmail.com> <30891.1319141196@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87fwinifqu.fsf@gmail.com> <32184.1319143892@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87zkgvgxe7.fsf@gmail.com> <1405.1319147324@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87zkgvfhra.fsf@gmail.com> <2127.1319148505@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87vcrjfgt1.fsf@gmail.com> <80sjmmvm60.fsf@somewhere.org> <4EA129DB.4070006@christianmoe.com> <8762ji5jr6.fsf@gmail.com> <87fwil10o2.fsf@gmail.com> <80pqhltnvc.fsf@somewhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: 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-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Hi Rainer, Rainer M Krug wrote: >> While thinking about all of this, and working in real-life documents, I >> just >> came back to a suggestion which I made some time ago. It goes about this >> enhancement: >> >> Would it be possible to specify "buffer-wide language specific" header >> arguments? >> >> That is, be able to say: >> >> "In this document, I want to: >> - tangle all my .sql chunks, but no other; >> - eval all the elisp chunks with query, but no other." >> >> Something we could write quite easily along the lines: >> >> #+PROPERTY: tangle no >> #+PROPERTY: eval never >> #+PROPERTY[SQL]: tangle yes >> #+PROPERTY[EMACS-LISP]: eval query >> >> (the syntax used here is just a draft sample!) >> >> What do you think about this feature? If you feel it can be something >> interesting to have, this is surely to incorporate in the current syntax >> debate. If not... never mind. > > I am not Eric, but I think that would be a good idea. Thanks for your comments. > Bu there needs to be a way of specifying more then one property, either > by #+PROPERTY+: or by any other way -I acually luike the #+PROPERTY+: . > Thinking about it, it should be possible without the +: > > #+PROPERTY[R]: tangle no > #+PROPERTY[R]: export both Yes, no need for a "+" here, as the lines do target different properties (in this case, "tangle" and "export"). > The more I see it, the more I like it - also the [] In fact, the lines without any language specification would be, at least semantically, equivalent to something like this: #+PROPERTY[*]: tangle no #+PROPERTY[*]: eval never Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban