From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: diff in `src' blocks
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 12:23:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJcAo8ssfTYLxszBPm05ZM7thk2-VtQUm58ox-MXLga4673VhQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <877gj3pc5v.fsf@kerstf.org>
	<loom.20130513T101312-409@post.gmane.org>
	<8738tqlq09.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52344)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <samologist@gmail.com>) id 1UbyKw-0005xr-DU
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:23:07 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <samologist@gmail.com>) id 1UbyKv-0003j4-16
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:23:06 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::22a]:47689)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <samologist@gmail.com>) id 1UbyKu-0003i2-Rb
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 13 May 2013 15:23:04 -0400
Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id j13so3303020wgh.1
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 12:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8738tqlq09.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

On 5/13/13, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
> All things considered, there may be room for an argument that Babel
> shouldn't ignore the data from STDOUT on non-zero exit or have an option
> to ignore the return code for cases like this.

That sounds good for newcomers.

Samuel

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  ANYBODY can get it.