From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: Possible bug with new exporter and org-babel Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 10:48:12 -0600 Message-ID: <87zjvpvbqr.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87d2slwwik.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39145) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeTTR-00083R-Qn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 20 May 2013 13:02:18 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeTTM-0001Dc-8y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 20 May 2013 13:02:13 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com ([209.85.220.48]:45198) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UeTGQ-0003sH-Rj for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 20 May 2013 12:48:46 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id kp6so5845215pab.35 for ; Mon, 20 May 2013 09:48:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (giles@pexip.com's message of "Mon, 20 May 2013 15:49:22 +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-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: giles@pexip.com Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain giles@pexip.com writes: > Eric Schulte writes: > >> Where *is* "req" defined? So far the behavior you describe seems >> expected. > > Sorry for the ambiguity - req isn't defined! > > Let me explain a little more clearly: I'm trying to generate some > release notes using org-mode, pulling data from the github issue > tracking system. I'm really just using org as a text markup > language. One comment in the issue tracker included a stack trace of the > form > > /foo/bar/call_req() > > where call_req is a function defined in our (non-org) code. The > presence of this plain text string in the body of my org document causes > exporting to fail. > > I'm not familiar with either the new exporter or the details of babel > (though a happy user of it), but my expected behaviour would be that any > babel cleverness would require more to invoke it than just call_foo() > or that there would be some means to say, on a document by document > basis "do not invoke babel" > Oh, I understand now, thanks for explaining. > > In any event: is there a way I can include the phrase "call_req()" in > the plain body of my document? Ideally without escaping it, but so so be > it. > You can either set the `org-export-babel-evaluate' variable to nil, which will inhibit all babel evaluation (this could be done using a file local variable), or you can escape call_req() as in the attached example. --=-=-= Content-Type: text/x-org Content-Disposition: inline; filename=example.org #+Options: ^:{} * Foo You can avoid attempted evaluation if the call is made to be an example (this will then export in monospace). =call_req()= Escaped inside a =call_req()= line of text. Another way to escape the stack trace as an example. : /foo/bar/call_req() --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain > > Thanks for your patience. Cheers, -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte --=-=-=--