Andreas Leha <andreas.l...@med.uni-goettingen.de> writes: > Hi Thorsten,
>> My use-case is actually this, and it won't work with wrapped results: >> >> ,---- >> | ** Utility Function :ARCHIVE: >> | >> | #+name: create-subtree-with-dblock >> | #+header: :var name="foo" >> | #+header: :var prms=":bar loo" >> | #+header: :results replace raw >> | #+begin_src emacs-lisp >> | (format >> | (concat "\n\n** Overview :READONLY:\n\n" >> | "#+begin: %s %s\n\n#+end:\n") >> | name prms) >> | #+end_src >> | >> | #+results: dblock >> | >> | >> | ** Overview :READONLY: >> | >> | #+begin: foo :bar loo >> | >> | #+end: >> `---- > > > I am not in the position to answer this. But the combo "raw replace" is > problematic, I think, in that it is hard to say how much there is to be > replaced. So I think some delimiters (as produced by :wrap) are > necesarry in the general case. I really don't want to dig into the Org Babel internals here, but that might well be the reason, since inserting multi-line raw Org syntax into the buffer makes it hard to tell whats new and whats old without some extra work/bookkeeping (doing a diff or so ...). > If I understand correctly, you want to nest blocks: A source block > nested in a results block. I think, that is not possible. So, for that > use case, I guess, another construct (other than results block) would be > necessary. Is a single ,---- | #+results: dblock `---- line seen as block (together will the following results)? Would surprise me, but I don't know. I don't want to nest blocks, I want to insert plain raw Org syntax into the buffer that is subsequently treated just like the other content I typed in by hand before (assuming the the leading #+results: line does not affect the contents usual interpretation). Maybe I'm bending Org-modes flexibility a bit too much here, but this is my real-world use-case. -- cheers, Thorsten
