Christian Moe <[email protected]> writes:

> Reza Housseini <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Thanks for your effort! I am not familiar with org-mode intrinsics,
>> thats why I can not really review your patch.
>
> That's fine. The maintainer will get around to it at some point.
> Meanwhile we can discuss it from a user perspective.
>
>> Regarding the update of the dynamic block, I guess it makes sense to
>> opt-out of this behavior via a flag if you don't want changed and
>> unsaved buffers?
>
> Yes, and maybe even an opt-in. Maybe it should be a new Babel header,
> like `:update-dblocks (yes|no|query)'. On the other hand, for this to
> cause any concerns, the user needs to reference a dynamic block in Babel
> in the first place. This apparently has not been a much-requested
> feature, so it's unlikely to trip many people up. It might even be
> enough to put a warning in the docs.

Yes maybe a warning is fine and we will see if we get any reactions from
the user after implementation and could then readjust.

>
> Regards,
> Christian

Reply via email to