Viktor Rosenfeld <listuse...@googlemail.com> writes: > Hi Eric, > > thanks for your input. I just pulled the latest code from git and while > my original example works, the following does not: > > :PROPERTIES: > :var: foo=1 > :var+: bar=2 > :var+: baz=3 > :END: > > #+BEGIN_SRC sh > echo foo: $foo > echo bar: $bar > echo baz: $baz > #+END_SRC >
Thanks for reporting, I've just pushed up a fix for this bug. > > There also appears to be a difference between quoted and unquoted > values and commatas. E.g. the following works > > :PROPERTIES: > :var: foo=1 > :var+: bar="2", baz=3 > :END: > > #+BEGIN_SRC sh > echo foo: $foo > echo bar: $bar > echo baz: $baz > #+END_SRC > > If I remove the quotes around 2 I get the following error: > > ad-Orig-error: reference '2,' not found in this buffer > > On the other hand, the following version does not produce an error, but > the value of $baz is not set. > > :PROPERTIES: > :var: foo=1 > :var+: bar="2", > :var+: baz=3 > :END: > > #+BEGIN_SRC sh > echo foo: $foo > echo bar: $bar > echo baz: $baz > #+END_SRC > Yes, the comma results in the 2 not being parsed as a number, which means that it will then try to be understood by Babel (which thinks first of a reference unless the value is wrapped in quotes indicating it is a string). The moral is to not give references purely numerical names. Best, > > Cheers, > Viktor > > Eric Schulte wrote: > >> Viktor Rosenfeld <listuse...@googlemail.com> writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > after following the discussion about the new BABEL syntax I was under >> > the impression that the following should work to set two variables in >> > one PROPERTIES drawer: >> > >> > :PROPERTIES: >> > :var: foo=1 >> > :var+: bar=2 >> > :END: >> > >> > However, the definition of bar is ignored. It turns out that there can >> > only be one :var: or :var+: entry in a drawer and the latter can only be >> > used to append to inherited entries, but not to those defined in the >> > same drawer. Is this the intended behavior? How would I define multiple >> > variables in a drawer (except for putting them all on one line)? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Viktor >> > >> >> You are correct, I believe this is a bug. I've just pushed up a fix, so >> your example above should now work as expected. >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> Eric Schulte >> http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/ >> > -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/