Hi Daniel, Daniel Bausch wrote: > Am Dienstag 25 Oktober 2011, 03:30:46 schrieb Eric Schulte: >> "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgw...@spammotel.com> writes: >> > Daniel Bausch wrote: >> >>> named code blocks [1] -- "source" "srcname" "function" >>>>> >>>>> calling external functions [2] -- "call" "lob" >>>>> >>>>> named data [3] -- "tblname" "resname" "results" "data" >>>> >>>> what about "#+name:" for [1] and [3], and "#+call:" for [2] ? >>>> >>>> That a table or list contains data is obvious. The only thing, the >>>> additional line is for, is to "name" it. >>> >>> As Eric showed us, this is not always to name it... If the table is the >>> results of an unamed block, you will have #+name: followed by no name! >>> >>> #+name: >>> | line 1 | data1 | >>> | line 2 | data2 | >>> >>> what I also find quite disturbing. >> >> I also find this to be disconcerting. -- Eric > > Then maybe #+results for (anonymous) results only, but #+name for anything > else from [1] and [3].
Just wanted to say I like the idea of keeping "results" for (at least) output of an anonymous call. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
