On Sunday, February 8th, 2026 at 10:06, Christian Moe <[email protected]>
wrote:
> It seems to me that the names ':strip-colnames' and ':detach-colnames'
> are also potentially misleading, because they only explicitly state that
> column names will be removed, not that they will be re-attached. If
> we're looking for a header name that makes more intuitive sense of the
> 'yes' and 'no' values, I'd maybe propose ':has-colnames'.
>
> But I'm not sure any slight gains in clarity justify a breaking change
> in the header name (and presumably in the ':rownames' header name as
> well).
I agree with this. This change seems to expose an internal mechanism few (I
think) use, at some cost. Also, what would happen to setting ":colnames yes"
in a code block so the results are in a table? Using "yes" or "no" for that is
clear and simple now.
> That sounds like an exhaustive list, and it's the only place where
> colnames is indexed. It might be worth mentioning that one can also add
> colnames to the output even if there aren't any to begin with, e.g.:
>
> #+begin_src elisp :colnames '("Odd" "Even")
> '((1 2) (3 4) (5 6))
> #+end_src
>
> #+RESULTS:
> | Odd | Even |
> |-----+------|
> | 1 | 2 |
> | 3 | 4 |
> | 5 | 6 |
I didn't know this either!
Bill
--
William Denton
https://www.miskatonic.org/
Librarian, artist and licensed private investigator.
Toronto, Canada
