> > If yes then I understand only now that the functionality of the new > > variable is of course the same for the changes in both commits and > > therefore the name has to be the same for the changes in both commits. > > But for me it would have helped to have some other name, containing > > neither "src-block", which I associate it with #+BEGIN_SRC but > > not #+CALL line or inline call_<name>, nor "head", which I associate > > with #+HEADER. I would like to suggest org-babel-exec-marker. What do > > you and Vitalie (CCed) think? > > I named it with "head" because head is the local variable in > org-babel-get-src-block-info referring to that position. There are > other functions that use -head: org-babel-goto-src-block-head, > org-babel-where-is-src-block-head. > > But, I agree that it might be better called beg, location or position. > > I think "src-block" is not misleading, there are plenty of > foo-src-block-bar in babel. > > May be then: org-babel-current-src-block-location? >
How about the shorter `org-babel-current-src-block'? It is somewhat more ambiguous, but the only reasonable options would be location or name, and not every code block has a name. I think the added brevity is worth the ambiguity, but I'm not strongly committed either way. I'll happily commit whatever is generally appealing. -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
