Oleh Krehel <ohwoeo...@gmail.com> writes: > Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes: > >> The current time is: src_emacs-lisp[:results html]{(format "<a >> href=%S>%s</a>" "http://google.com" (format-time-string "%H:%M"))}. > > This is quite restrictive, since it implies that I want to export to > HTML. What I really want is to insert a raw string, with no further > processing into the export, whatever format the export may have.
Then use [:results raw]. This is also in the manual. > I think it's better to have people use !(foo) than to be turned away by > src_emacs-lisp[:results html]{(foo)} and use nothing at all. You don't have to write [:results html] or [:results raw] for every inline block you write. You can set the results per subtree, per document, or globally. So really, it boils down to: src_emacs-lisp{(foo)} You can even define a macro for that #+MACRO: eval src_emacs-lisp[:results raw]{($1)} {{{eval(foo)}}} even less characters. > Besides, Elisp is a very strong library for Org. We could also have > e.g. > > #+INLINE_LANG Elisp > > to set the language for !() in the current document. Again, having duplicate syntax is out of question, IMO. I don't think the current one is hideous either. With all due respect, the fact that you don't like it is really insufficient as a justification for introducing a special alternate syntax. >> Do you want to provide a patch for it? > > I could provide a patch for `org-edit-src-code' to work with !(). I'm > not interested in using the current inline syntax. Too bad, then. Regards,