From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarmo Hurri Subject: Re: Include lines in setupfile are not evaluated: bug or feature? Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 08:17:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87woawbxpx.fsf@iki.fi> References: <87fthwsh1d.fsf@iki.fi> <8736dwwfgg.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87a7831fda.fsf@iki.fi> <87y2vntdop.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52139) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1igjhc-0000t9-AA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:17:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1igjhb-0001kz-9b for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:17:56 -0500 Received: from 195-159-176-226.customer.powertech.no ([195.159.176.226]:42734 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1igjhb-0001gD-39 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:17:55 -0500 Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1igjhY-000y9M-Jl for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 07:17:52 +0100 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@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Greetings again. Nicolas Goaziou writes: >> Ok. As a programmer I was hoping to mix them, because it would be >> logical to have _one_ header file that defines all the common things >> for a set of related files. > > Again, there is no overlap between the two keywords. SETUPFILE is what > you want. INCLUDE is only meaningful during export (and is only > documented there). I cannot think of a real situation where you would > need both for the same file. I have such documents regularly. 1. One type is a handout containing common contents at the beginning (included) and settings (setup). 2. The other case is a set of files sharing setup info and code (babel blocks, included). >> Do I understand correctly: the description in the documentation is >> not correct in the sense that not all contents from SETUPFILE is >> evaluated as if it were included in the buffer? > > I think the document is correct, although I understand it can be > misleading: it uses the verb "to include", but with a different > meaning than INCLUDE keyword. It includes in-buffer settings, not full > contents. > >> I am just trying to think about how this limitation, if it exists, >> should be expressed in documentation. Shall I give it a try? > > Sure, but please do not mix SETUPFILE and INCLUDE, which are > unrelated. I will give it a try during the Christmas break. All the best, Jarmo