Jack, I will be going offline for a week or so, so I will have to defer more discussion.
I know that `silent' silences an unwanted file link. And there are a few other ways to do this. So, if it is determined to proceed, adding an implicit `file' will not prohibit uses in which it was not actually wanted. Best, Chuck > On Jul 10, 2021, at 2:00 PM, Jack Kamm <jackk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Chuck, > >> If you modify the ECM to change `:exports results' to `:exports >> none' and clean older fig[12].png's from the directory, the export >> fails. > > Thanks for this example. I had mistakenly thought that code blocks > with ":exports none" would be evaluated for side effects, but you are > right, these blocks are skipped altogether during export. > > Instead, I think this use case could be handled by the ":results silent" > header. Blocks with that header are evaluated during export, but the > result is not inserted into the org buffer or the exported document. It > seems like a more general way to evaluate code blocks for side effects > only. > > To test this out, you could replace the header arguments in your > example with: > > ":exports results :results graphics file silent :file fig1.png" > >> So if everyone else is determined to make this change I can live >> with it. > > I do hope someone submits an RFC, so we can discuss this more > concretely. I still think it would be nice if we could go back to just > ":results graphics" to insert a figure. Unfortunately, I'm not currently > able to propose the patch, as I'm still in limbo w.r.t. my employer > agreement.