Hi Bastien, Thanks for your feedback.
2014ko apirilak 22an, Bastien-ek idatzi zuen: [...] >> #+name: one >> #+begin_src R :results file graphics :file png >> ... >> #+end_src > > What happens when there is :file png with no #+name line? This case will be treated as before the patch: output will go to the “png” file. (The :output-dir property, if present, will apply.) > Does :output-dir accept absolute or relative paths? I'm asking > because you speak of "subdirectory", but both should be accepted > IMHO. I agree. I think the current patch does this as long as :output-dir is an absolute pathname, but I have not tested that case. I will > > Maybe there are cases where the :file value does not take an extension > but the user still want to write the output to this file? How would > your patch handle this? At present, it doesn’t. > Looks useful to me, but ":file png" looks wrong, with too much > implicit. We should find something less confusing. One option would be to use :file-ext instead, to generate a :file parameter. I didn’t go this route because autogenerating :file from other parameters seemed like too much magic. But your points in the other direction are good. How does this sound as an algorithm: 1. if :file is present, behave exactly as we do now 2. if :file is absent but :file-ext and a #+name is present, generate a :file parameter from :output-dir, the #+name, and :file-ext. Open questions: 1. should :file-ext without a #+name be a no-op, or an error? 2. should :output-dir apply to the :file case as well? -- Aaron Ecay
