Matthew MacLean <archen...@gmail.com> writes: > Alright, done. Is this acceptable? (Provided that tests don't count towards > line count, of course)
Thanks. A few minor comments on the commit message. > Subject: [PATCH] ob-ruby: Fix double-escaping > > * lisp/ob-ruby.el: Remove second call to > `org-babel-ruby-table-or-string' in `org-babel-ruby-evaluate'. Please add the name of the changed function in parentheses after the file name rather than putting it in the description body. > * testing/lisp/test-ob-ruby.el: Add test to verify > `org-babel-execute:ruby' can evaluate Ruby code. (What the > double-escape prevented) Same here for the test name. "Add test." for description would do. > I removed the escaping from `org-babel-ruby-evaluate', because the only > place `org-babel-ruby-evaluate' is ever called is in > `org-babel-execute:ruby'. > > In this function, its result either escaped (Where the double escape > previously occurred) or passed in as the "scalar-form" of > `org-babel-result-cond', which handles the "pp" and "code" parameters. > (A place that doesn't need escaping.) I think the above two paragraphs could be replaced by a link to this ML post. Thanks for working on this. -- Kyle