On 2021-02-11 18:44, Diego Zamboni wrote:
> #2 is known (maybe documented? Not sure) behavior: using :noweb-ref
> accumulates multiple blocks with the same name, whereas #+NAME uses only
> the first one. I think #+NAME's are supposed to be unique within a document.
It seems that more recent
On 2021-02-11 18:44, Diego Zamboni wrote:
> #2 is known (maybe documented? Not sure) behavior: using :noweb-ref
> accumulates multiple blocks with the same name, whereas #+NAME uses only
> the first one.
Deep in org-babel-tangle,
Lee Jia Hong,
on your second surprise, there was some discussion on the e-mail list,
around 19 April, 2020, somewhere near this area. you might refer to
that.
cheers, again, Greg
Lee Jia Hong,
for your surprise number one, maybe look at this point of the Org Manual
Noweb insertions honor prefix characters that appear before the noweb
syntax reference.
basically, if the source of a <> has multiple lines (N, say), then the
output of a subsequent <> *copies* that
Jia,
#2 is known (maybe documented? Not sure) behavior: using :noweb-ref
accumulates multiple blocks with the same name, whereas #+NAME uses only
the first one. I think #+NAME's are supposed to be unique within a document.
I don't know about #1, the output from your P1 example seems surprising
(First time posting to a mailing list, please correct me if I did something
wrong.)
TLDR:
Surprise 1: Different Noweb reference placing styles produces different tangled
results.
Question 1: Is it a bug?
Surprise 2: Source block naming with #+NAME: and :noweb-ref produce different
tangled
