Re: [bugs] Export to HTML requires issuing org-babel-execute-buffer; results replace fails

[Eric Schulte <eric.schulte@gmx.com>]

>
> Just to be clear, do you consider the following to be an inline block?
>  (I usually think of inline as limited to src_R{ ...} type things).
> Or are you generally talking about the distinction between #+begin_src
> / #+end_src lines vs #+call lines?
>
> #+begin_src R :results output raw replace :exports results
>  cat.fname.link()
> #+end_src
>

My terminology is

 inline block :: src_foo{} which can live on a line with text
        block :: begin/end_src foo, which is a block element
    call line :: #+call: which lives on a block by itself

If /inline blocks/ above don't replace their results above then that is
expected.  If you can find instances where call lines or blocks don't
replace their results then that is a bug.

>
> Finally, in the last file of my original message I try to use #+call's
> everywhere instead of source blocks.  Cleaned up example is pasted
> below.  It looks broken (the first #+call bar is out of order, the
> second and third #+call bar's don't run), see
> http://pastebin.com/LqYK0Ps2 with my annotation where the output looks
> broken
>

Ah, this is a different issue, but one which should be discussed.  I'm
happy we're working through all of these before the Emacs24 release.

The problem below is not order of evaluation but rather insertion of
results.  The elements are evaluated in order, but the results from the
bar() call lines are all inserted in the same place.  In the current
code the raw text of the call line is used to insert the results, so
identical call lines replace each other's results.

So in the following...

#+NAME: foo-for-R
#+HEADER: :var a="a1.png"
#+BEGIN_SRC R :results output silent
  cat("in foo-for-R block\n")
  cat.a <- function() { cat(a,"\n",sep="") }
  cat.a()
#+END_SRC

#+NAME: bar-for-R
#+begin_src R :results output raw replace :exports none
 cat.a()
#+end_src

Because there are three instances of the =bar-for-R()= call line, all of
their results are inserted into the same place in the file, specifically
the location of the =#+Results: bar-for-R()= line.  This can be very
confusing if you are expected each =bar-for-R()= line to generate it's
own results.

Should have all a1 stuff
#+call: foo-for-R(a="a1.png")
#+call: bar-for-R()

Should have all a2 stuff
#+call: foo-for-R(a="a2.png")
#+call: bar-for-R()

Should have all a3 stuff
#+call: foo-for-R(a="a3.png")
#+call: bar-for-R()

The solution demonstrated below is to add a nothing header argument to
each bar-for-R to make it unique.  Notice that the three =foo= lines
below don't include results, as their results are inserted at the
identical foo lines above.

Should have all a1 stuff
#+call: foo-for-R(a="a1.png")
#+call: bar-for-R[id=1]()

Should have all a2 stuff
#+call: foo-for-R(a="a2.png")
#+call: bar-for-R[id=2]()

Should have all a3 stuff
#+call: foo-for-R(a="a3.png")
#+call: bar-for-R[id=3]()

Although the above is a workaround, it may be cumbersome.  I'm on the
fence about whether to try to change the existing behavior.  If each
identical call line is thought of as a token of the same call then maybe
it makes sense to have only one location in which to insert the results
of that call (also it is possible that some users are relying on the
current behavior).  That said it is certainly confusing...

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/