emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [O] [new exporter] two unexpected behaviours of an #+INCLUDEd #+call


From: Nicolas Goaziou
Subject: Re: [O] [new exporter] two unexpected behaviours of an #+INCLUDEd #+call
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:27:07 +0100

Hello,

"Myles English" <address@hidden> writes:

> Given the situation below, I would expect that the block named xxx
> would never be evaluated:
>
> #--------------------- file b.org -------------------
> #+TITLE:     b.org
> #+EXPORT_SELECT_TAGS: export
> #+EXPORT_EXCLUDE_TAGS: noexport
>
> * A heading                      :noexport:
>
> #+INCLUDE: "c.org"
>
> #--------------------- file c.org -------------------
> * A Heading in c.org
> #+name: xxx
> #+BEGIN_SRC sh
> echo "Evaluated" > c.out #+END_SRC
>
> #+call: xxx()
>
> #----------------------------------------------------

:noexport: doesn't mean Babel blocks within shouldn't be evaluated. It
just means contents will eventually be ignored.

> And maybe it isn't evaluated but the call is still processed to some
> extent upon latex export:
>
> #+BEGIN_SRC sh :shebang "#!/usr/bin/env bash" :tangle eval_bug.sh
> emacs -Q --batch --eval "(progn
>                (add-to-list 'load-path
>                  (expand-file-name \"./lisp/\"))
>                (add-to-list 'load-path
>                  (expand-file-name \"./contrib/lisp/\" t))
>                (require 'org-e-latex)
>                (org-babel-do-load-languages
>                 'org-babel-load-languages
>                 '((sh . t)))
>                (find-file \"b.org\")
>                (org-e-latex-export-to-latex))"
> #+END_SRC
>
>  $ ./eval_bug.sh
> Loading /home/myles/.emacs.d/plugins/org-mode/lisp/org-loaddefs.el (source)...
> OVERVIEW
> Loading vc-git...
> OVERVIEW
> OVERVIEW
> Reference 'xxx' not found in this buffer
>
> Removing the :noexport: results in the same message as above, removing
> the #+call causes c.org to be included but even adding these line to the
> batch function above will not cause the block to be evaluated
> (i.e. there is no c.out written):

This should be fixed in master. Thank you for the report.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou



reply via email to

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