Re: Possible fix for :includes header argument in org-babel C source blocks

[Kévin Le Gouguec]

Brandon Guttersohn <brandon@guttersohn.org> writes:

> Apologies for the regression, and thank you for fixing it. I neglected
> to run the tests before suggesting that fix -- I'll try not to do that
> again..

No biggie, that got me to finally try out Babel ;)

<rant>
I don't know if it's been mentioned in the "issue tracker?" thread, but
if I could pick just *one* feature off web-based forges, it'd be
automated testing with CI…

I find the "make-test-before-commit" discipline easy enough to adhere to
at $DAYJOB; it's not as straightforward when contributing to free
software, when I'm frequently pressed for time, running on battery on a
low-end laptop…

Running a few unit tests is not a big deal, but it's not trivial to
anticipate which ones to run; test-foo.el is rarely enough to catch
regressions introduced by tweaking foo.el.  

Having something (e.g. emba.gnu.org) pick up patches sent to the mailing
list and report new test failures would be very helpful, for
contributors if not for maintainers.
 </rant>

> I can at least confirm that the patch wasn't intended to change how
> C-header-files are specified in the org-babel-block-header. The goal
> was only to change how the headers are formatted in the generated
> C-language file during execution, and only for headers which were not
> wrapped in <>'s.

OK; IIUC, before the patch it was not possible to generate double-quoted
includes short of backslash-escaping the double quotes; that's why I
assumed that the goal of the patch was to make it easier to use
double-quoted includes, which I thought worth advertising in ORG-NEWS.