Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes: > Andreas Leha <andreas.l...@med.uni-goettingen.de> writes: > >> FWIW, I agree that COMMENT should be equivalent to individual line # . > > I hope you mean it should be equivalent during export only. Otherwise, > it would introduce some serious slowdown as COMMENT can be inherited. >
I see. I did not consider any possible slow-downs. I'd expect COMMENT to behave exactly like # in every regard -- not only export. That is a clearly defined behaviour, that should not produce confusion. But I am not sure (hence my question below) whether there are use cases that need different behaviour. If COMMENT is only valid for export, then I would actually recommend to rename it to make that clear. >> Sections that should be accessible without being exported get >> the :noexport: tag. >> >> Is there any usecase for COMMENTed sections that is not covered >> by :noexport:? > > Babel code from a :noexport: headline is executed. It isn't when in > a COMMENT headline. I think both are useful. I completely agree. My question was, what a use case would be that requires a COMMENT that behaves different from #'ing the individual lines (and is not covered by :noexport: already). Regards, Andreas
