From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id gFQUA2ezVF/VeQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 10:01:11 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id 2OiVOmazVF+nOAAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 10:01:10 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56C6F9406BB for ; Sun, 6 Sep 2020 10:01:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:42752 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kErTw-0005Fy-51 for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 06:01:08 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36104) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kErTH-0005Fp-Cv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 06:00:27 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]:42756) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kErTF-0007cV-Ln; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 06:00:27 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id c18so11591335wrm.9; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 03:00:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9Q4/xHDK4LLUs0Rs307FolB0IxmGghhScc13nE/mGVA=; b=cIq9dkD/+xMxerBprmHtzfkEIfjmGfAO3MXgyJCv9kbaXeU/urPaGj5vQ6I37tWLNf /qD9XilrQiIbyVR4yQlwwDeeM3Po1gLQb41VhHwXw3ivSyQnIeJGO/orpaaSGUWb/KbM UWmr76LOQ8tzs9pJUDmhtw1vKyVQDEG/9CdHg42d8k68bQMm1VaN42BzRh4PZQhG68i2 WXzwN+lHB+t2SRS3lOnlceaaAuo1nLn3y1629JT3BWNd7XpRQjNB40AyXOPEkPDv6LwC t33rshW5eoUhyoJIW0g0hn3QzcXpKHNld2aP7jqcc3PnEE9p/sVejOsBi4NS+TDaI9wH iTKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9Q4/xHDK4LLUs0Rs307FolB0IxmGghhScc13nE/mGVA=; b=Fii/Mnigvl+OxRbGY7nwi1X/235iShMSXKLfAeRwAqCAuWNGSROwTkdvzqE4wJRe1S 1SRIz+OoDvn/8dGtsKKGBhn242xE2+aMrS2IKb53MXTcJPHzyki8smOVQaESUrGeBfep uP9Ck0sOz+Fo6m1/lsVCAlYxYMj5qOiS7uLTVRH2jXqgjpyCC87mxgN+r2ZgGG82x4Xj BSL3236QmIDFZdWX43+Y+N6GwOcWzFVe8LtReI46O8wGKh8qMkwz/TUdMA4Z0mNF1D3m QdQ3qrVrFcPLZViVxBBat0kjLNu/nwERDKEH0hJwLXt1W/TKKUw8/hWS2+vFeJQZ4WIT VGPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Zpoj5jhKHWIIRjNz85bxJL53Yz58F/bpCYKXODUg1y2QfMSjo 5Mbe24AT1yYVzvYGEPK9+vLPP4kCEPWMw007AVAQu+viXNw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwtQoOKZQylJDSEjTIi86u/YzQ5/cDRtGzYQWcx/MyR50X0h9owDIs63TwsHULANW7BEUr31kr01NZOeELn3G0= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:684b:: with SMTP id o11mr16935295wrw.101.1599386423120; Sun, 06 Sep 2020 03:00:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <877dt9ey2c.fsf@gmail.com> <87sgbvnt50.fsf@bzg.fr> In-Reply-To: <87sgbvnt50.fsf@bzg.fr> From: Tom Gillespie Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2020 03:00:11 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FEATURE REQUEST] No tangle of code blocks within archived subtrees To: Bastien Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42b; envelope-from=tgbugs@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x42b.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: flare , emacs-orgmode Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=cIq9dkD/; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.71 X-TUID: lPRodNs+pgf1 Hi Bastien, My initial reaction was to say yes to all of these in the name of consistency, but there are nuances for org-babel-ref-resolve and org-babel-expand-noweb-references that are different than for org-babel-exp-process-buffer. If I have a block that nowebbs in another block, and at some point that other block is archived, do we treat it as if the block never existed? I don't think we do. Same for org-babel-ref-resolve. Those names exist and we know they exist, we just don't display/export them. I'm basing this on the assumption that users who archive headings don't want to see them/search them, not that they wanted to remove them entirely or refactor things related to them. It might make sense to warn if a block that is nowebbed in has been archived so the user can do something about it if they want, but I think having archiving effectively induce a null pointer is a bad idea. I wonder what other perspectives there are on this. Best! Tom On Sun, Sep 6, 2020 at 2:37 AM Bastien wrote: > - org-babel-exp-process-buffer Yes > - org-babel-ref-resolve Probably not? > - org-babel-expand-noweb-references Probably not?