emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] [patch, ox] #+INCLUDE resolves links


From: Xavier Garrido
Subject: Re: [O] [patch, ox] #+INCLUDE resolves links
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 09:29:17 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2

Hi,

Following the discussion here http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/91322/match=improved+way, I have quickly tested the patch and it perfectly fits my needs. So thanks again.

Just one remark : there is an undefined @ref tag in org.texi (line 10011) file that should referred to "search option in file link". Compilation fails due to error in documentation generation.

Cheers,
Xavier

Le 01/10/2014 23:27, Rasmus a écrit :
Hi,

Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:

It isn't very important, but you forgot full stops at the end of
comments in the test file.

Fixed.

I want to discuss one more important potential issue before having the
patch applied.  Currently, location is ignored if the included part is
not an env (line 3381) and not a block (3392).  I'm not sure this is
right.  I could do one of the following:

    1. Nothing (current state)
    2. Throw an error if location and env or block are combined.
    3. Try to use location even if block is set.  Recall, though, that
       location is resolved using org-mode.
    4. Let location be a general regexp if env or block is non-nil.
       But then we are breaking with the org file-link idea.
    5. Make location work for org files when env or block, otherwise
       throw an error.

WDYT?

I think option 1 is perfect. If a block with org contents is needed, one
can always do

   #+begin_center
   #+include: "file.org::*headline"
   #+end_center

Block and environments are really meant for literal insertion, where
locations do not apply.

Great!  Less work.

We can always tune it later as necessary.

+                (only-contents
+ (and (string-match ":only-contents *?\\([^: \r\t\n]\\S-*\\)?"
value)

Is the shy *? necessary?

No!  Only the * is necessary to catch an implicit nil.  Thanks.

Feel free to commit the attached patch if there's nothing else.

—Rasmus




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]