Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 15/03/12 17:14, Nick Dokos wrote: Sebastien Vauban wxhgmqzgw...@spammotel.com wrote: Hi Nick and Eric, Nick Dokos wrote: Eric Schulte eric.schu...@gmx.com wrote: Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written? Just to clarify: do I really have to C-c C-c on each line? If I add a bunch of them and then do C-c C-c on one of them, shouldn't that be enough to refresh the setup? I got no reaction on my idea of automagic C-c C-c (on 2012-03-04 Sun, see http://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-orgmode@gnu.org/msg52739.html): The automagic C-c C-c should be NOT[1] done after each key press or some such. That certainly would be a killer feature, in its real acception: performance would be unbearable. In my mind, automatically (re-)parsing the meta options should be each time the user presses `C-c C-v C-e' (eval code blocks); that is, when the user expects his options to be taken into account. Does it make sense? Best regards, Seb Footnotes: [1] This word was missing (in the original post)! Well, it might make sense but you can try it out and let us know: - make files with 10, 100, 1000 trivial (or even empty) code blocks, just enough to make sure that org-babel-execute-maybe is really called on them: I think that it will be called even on empty code blocks, but I'm not sure if there is some optimization in there. - measure the time it takes to export each one to html (say). - add a call to org-mode-restart into org-babel-execute-maybe, and time the same operation again: how significant is the slowdown? If the slowdown is bearable in these cases, then it will be bearable in realistic situations, where block execution is going to be a much more significant fraction of the total. BTW, what's the biggest file you (all, not just Seb) have in terms of the number of code blocks it contains? In my case, the largest one had about two dozen code blocks, so the 100 case would easily cover me, but I suspect there are much bigger ones out there. 142 - used in literal programming. Rainer Nick - -- Rainer M. Krug, PhD (Conservation Ecology, SUN), MSc (Conservation Biology, UCT), Dipl. Phys. (Germany) Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology Stellenbosch University South Africa Tel : +33 - (0)9 53 10 27 44 Cell: +33 - (0)6 85 62 59 98 Fax : +33 - (0)9 58 10 27 44 Fax (D):+49 - (0)3 21 21 25 22 44 email: rai...@krugs.de Skype: RMkrug -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk9m7JsACgkQoYgNqgF2egoV4ACeISeB8GZWSCDSkIPgqIHViqeh fokAn3cgygfMKr2VInkLkHHX3gIPe58G =S2uU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Hi Nick, Nick Dokos wrote: The automagic C-c C-c should be NOT[1] done after each key press or some such. That certainly would be a killer feature, in its real acception: performance would be unbearable. In my mind, automatically (re-)parsing the meta options should be each time the user presses `C-c C-v C-e' (eval code blocks); that is, when the user expects his options to be taken into account. Does it make sense? Best regards, Seb Footnotes: [1] This word was missing (in the original post)! Well, it might make sense but you can try it out and let us know: - make files with 10, 100, 1000 trivial (or even empty) code blocks, just enough to make sure that org-babel-execute-maybe is really called on them: I think that it will be called even on empty code blocks, but I'm not sure if there is some optimization in there. - measure the time it takes to export each one to html (say). - add a call to org-mode-restart into org-babel-execute-maybe, and time the same operation again: how significant is the slowdown? If the slowdown is bearable in these cases, then it will be bearable in realistic situations, where block execution is going to be a much more significant fraction of the total. I'll give it a shot, and report the pre/post results à la Weight Watchers. Thanks for pointing out some detailed calls I have to make for testing that idea! BTW, what's the biggest file you (all, not just Seb) have in terms of the number of code blocks it contains? In my case, the largest one had about two dozen code blocks, so the 100 case would easily cover me, but I suspect there are much bigger ones out there. The biggest number of code blocks in any document I have is around 20. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Hi Nick and Eric, Nick Dokos wrote: Eric Schulte eric.schu...@gmx.com wrote: Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written? Just to clarify: do I really have to C-c C-c on each line? If I add a bunch of them and then do C-c C-c on one of them, shouldn't that be enough to refresh the setup? I got no reaction on my idea of automagic C-c C-c (on 2012-03-04 Sun, see http://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-orgmode@gnu.org/msg52739.html): The automagic C-c C-c should be NOT[1] done after each key press or some such. That certainly would be a killer feature, in its real acception: performance would be unbearable. In my mind, automatically (re-)parsing the meta options should be each time the user presses `C-c C-v C-e' (eval code blocks); that is, when the user expects his options to be taken into account. Does it make sense? Best regards, Seb Footnotes: [1] This word was missing (in the original post)! -- Sebastien Vauban
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Sebastien Vauban wxhgmqzgw...@spammotel.com wrote: Hi Nick and Eric, Nick Dokos wrote: Eric Schulte eric.schu...@gmx.com wrote: Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written? Just to clarify: do I really have to C-c C-c on each line? If I add a bunch of them and then do C-c C-c on one of them, shouldn't that be enough to refresh the setup? I got no reaction on my idea of automagic C-c C-c (on 2012-03-04 Sun, see http://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-orgmode@gnu.org/msg52739.html): The automagic C-c C-c should be NOT[1] done after each key press or some such. That certainly would be a killer feature, in its real acception: performance would be unbearable. In my mind, automatically (re-)parsing the meta options should be each time the user presses `C-c C-v C-e' (eval code blocks); that is, when the user expects his options to be taken into account. Does it make sense? Best regards, Seb Footnotes: [1] This word was missing (in the original post)! Well, it might make sense but you can try it out and let us know: - make files with 10, 100, 1000 trivial (or even empty) code blocks, just enough to make sure that org-babel-execute-maybe is really called on them: I think that it will be called even on empty code blocks, but I'm not sure if there is some optimization in there. - measure the time it takes to export each one to html (say). - add a call to org-mode-restart into org-babel-execute-maybe, and time the same operation again: how significant is the slowdown? If the slowdown is bearable in these cases, then it will be bearable in realistic situations, where block execution is going to be a much more significant fraction of the total. BTW, what's the biggest file you (all, not just Seb) have in terms of the number of code blocks it contains? In my case, the largest one had about two dozen code blocks, so the 100 case would easily cover me, but I suspect there are much bigger ones out there. Nick
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Nick Dokos nicholas.do...@hp.com writes: Sebastien Vauban wxhgmqzgw...@spammotel.com wrote: Hi Nick and Eric, Nick Dokos wrote: Eric Schulte eric.schu...@gmx.com wrote: Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written? Just to clarify: do I really have to C-c C-c on each line? If I add a bunch of them and then do C-c C-c on one of them, shouldn't that be enough to refresh the setup? I got no reaction on my idea of automagic C-c C-c (on 2012-03-04 Sun, see http://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-orgmode@gnu.org/msg52739.html): The automagic C-c C-c should be NOT[1] done after each key press or some such. That certainly would be a killer feature, in its real acception: performance would be unbearable. In my mind, automatically (re-)parsing the meta options should be each time the user presses `C-c C-v C-e' (eval code blocks); that is, when the user expects his options to be taken into account. Does it make sense? Best regards, Seb Footnotes: [1] This word was missing (in the original post)! Well, it might make sense but you can try it out and let us know: - make files with 10, 100, 1000 trivial (or even empty) code blocks, just enough to make sure that org-babel-execute-maybe is really called on them: I think that it will be called even on empty code blocks, but I'm not sure if there is some optimization in there. - measure the time it takes to export each one to html (say). - add a call to org-mode-restart into org-babel-execute-maybe, and time the same operation again: how significant is the slowdown? If the slowdown is bearable in these cases, then it will be bearable in realistic situations, where block execution is going to be a much more significant fraction of the total. BTW, what's the biggest file you (all, not just Seb) have in terms of the number of code blocks it contains? In my case, the largest one had about two dozen code blocks, so the 100 case would easily cover me, but I suspect there are much bigger ones out there. Hi Nick, 118 source code blocks and growing. Tom Nick -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com
[O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
1) I see from http://orgmode.org/Changes.html, section Incompatible changes,
that I have to change my #+BABEL: lines to something else, in order to upgrade
from 7.7 to 7.8.03. But I can't figure out to what.
I previously had:
#+BABEL: :session *R* :results output :exports both
#+begin_src R :exports none :results silent
setwd('c:/Users/ken/wdir')
source(src/main/R/mylib.R)
#+end_src
What does that translate to, using #+PROPERTY: syntax? I tried the following,
but then when I execute a #+begin_src R block, it doesn't evaluate in a
session called *R*, it just evaluates in-process. No *R* buffer is created.
#+PROPERTY: session *R*
#+PROPERTY: results output
#+PROPERTY: exports both
A pointer to some transition doc would also be great, if such a thing exists.
2) In the same list of Incompatible changes, it says code blocks are named
with - results are named with code block may still be labeled with named with
#+tblname: will be considered to be named results. What on earth does that
mean?? I would offer a doc patch but I can't figure it out. =)
--
Ken Williams, Senior Research Scientist
WindLogics
http://windlogics.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any kind is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Hi Ken,
Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written?
Property lines only take effect either with C-c C-c, or when the file is
first opened.
Best,
Ken Williams ken.willi...@windlogics.com writes:
1) I see from http://orgmode.org/Changes.html, section Incompatible
changes, that I have to change my #+BABEL: lines to something else,
in order to upgrade from 7.7 to 7.8.03. But I can't figure out to
what.
I previously had:
#+BABEL: :session *R* :results output :exports both
#+begin_src R :exports none :results silent
setwd('c:/Users/ken/wdir')
source(src/main/R/mylib.R)
#+end_src
What does that translate to, using #+PROPERTY: syntax? I tried the
following, but then when I execute a #+begin_src R block, it doesn't
evaluate in a session called *R*, it just evaluates in-process. No
*R* buffer is created.
#+PROPERTY: session *R*
#+PROPERTY: results output
#+PROPERTY: exports both
A pointer to some transition doc would also be great, if such a thing exists.
2) In the same list of Incompatible changes, it says code blocks
are named with - results are named with code block may still be
labeled with named with #+tblname: will be considered to be named
results. What on earth does that mean?? I would offer a doc patch
but I can't figure it out. =)
--
Ken Williams, Senior Research Scientist
WindLogics
http://windlogics.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any
kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message. Thank you.
--
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Aha! That was the trick, thanks. How about a translation of the text for question 2)? -Ken -Original Message- From: Eric Schulte [mailto:eric.schu...@gmx.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:29 PM To: Ken Williams Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Subject: Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY: Hi Ken, Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written? Property lines only take effect either with C-c C-c, or when the file is first opened. [...] 2) In the same list of Incompatible changes, it says code blocks are named with - results are named with code block may still be labeled with named with #+tblname: will be considered to be named results. What on earth does that mean?? I would offer a doc patch but I can't figure it out. =) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
How about a translation of the text for question 2)? [...] 2) In the same list of Incompatible changes, it says code blocks are named with - results are named with code block may still be labeled with named with #+tblname: will be considered to be named results. What on earth does that mean?? I would offer a doc patch but I can't figure it out. =) Name code blocks with #+name: and their results will be named with #+results:, e.g., #+name: foo #+begin_src emacs-lisp :foo #+end_src #+RESULTS: foo : :foo If you want to include literal data you should also use #+name: to name the data, e.g., #+name: bar : bar For backwards compatibility and inter-operation with existing table functionality, you can use #+tblname: instead of #+name: when naming a table. #+tblname: baz | foo | bar | | baz | quz | Hope that clarifies. Cheers, -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
-Original Message- From: Eric Schulte [mailto:eric.schu...@gmx.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:40 PM To: Ken Williams Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Subject: Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY: How about a translation of the text for question 2)? [...] Hope that clarifies. Cheers, Thanks. I think I see what happened - the following text (in the commit message for 7e93b90f8816346a16ad49cee22870b17c05b211) : - call lines are specified with #+call: - code blocks are named with #+name: - results are named with #+name:, however results generated by a code block may still be labeled with #+results:, and tables named with #+tblname: will be considered to be named results got mangled by the HTML builder into this: call lines are specified with #+call: code blocks are named with - results are named with code block may still be labeled with named with #+tblname: will be considered to be named results So some '#' characters probably need to be escaped. -Ken CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
Re: [O] I'm tripping over #+BABEL: vs. #+PROPERTY:
Eric Schulte eric.schu...@gmx.com wrote: Did you press C-c C-c on each property line after it was written? Just to clarify: do I really have to C-c C-c on each line? If I add a bunch of them and then do C-c C-c on one of them, shouldn't that be enough to refresh the setup? Thanks, Nick
