Ihor Radchenko writes:
> As Max described, it might be a potential issue.
How about (1) we merge the patch, and then
(2) we add the lint warning if/when someone
has the [hypothesized] problem?
Rudy
--
"One can begin to reason only when a clear picture has been formed in
the imagination."
--
> You dropped mailing list from the CC. Was it intentional?
Whoops, no. Still figuring out an email solution in emacs.
> If I understand your concern correctly, you may simply let-bind
> `org-babel-common-header-args-
> w-values' in the tests to make sure that
> your new parameter merging code
Mehmet Tekman writes:
>> setq unexplained-params (delete-dups unexplained-params))
>
> The help mentions that it stores the result in the list, and it looks
> like it works
>
> #+BEGIN_SRC elisp
> (let ((x '(1 2 1 2 3))) (delete-dups x) x)
> #+END_SRC
This is just implementation detail.
As a
Thanks for the review!
> setq unexplained-params (delete-dups unexplained-params))
The help mentions that it stores the result in the list, and it looks
like it works
#+BEGIN_SRC elisp
(let ((x '(1 2 1 2 3))) (delete-dups x) x)
#+END_SRC
>
> What we can do it make `org-babel-read' assign a
David Masterson writes:
> I think begin.html is a good starting point. Mentioning 'texdoc latex'
> is also simple (and more LaTeX specific) and most likely to work. You
> could include a parenthetical note that, if it doesn't work, try the
> URL. After that, new users can dig through the
Mehmet Tekman writes:
>It's a big patch mostly, because there were no intermediate commits
>in which the org framework wouldn't be broken. Hope that's okay!
Sure it is.
> ** Problems
>
> It seems to work well for most tests, except for the "file with
> spaces.txt" which I'm not sure
Okay, and now I've patched the related string splitting functions so that
("let's get \"ready to rumble\" now")
is split into:
("let's" "get" "ready to rumble" "now")
All my tests are passing but a few unrelated ones are failing so I'll need
to dig more into what's going on
