Hello, ed...@openmail.cc writes:
> My comment for today is that I have something like this: > > this-file.org > .............................. > * Fancy header 1 > > #+NAME: blk1 > #+begin_src python > > import numpy as np #+end_src > > ** Fancy subheader 2 > > Res 1 > > #+include: "this-file.org::blk1" > > Res 2 > > #+include: "this-file.org::blk1" src python > > Res 3 > > #+include: "./this-file.org::blk1" src python > .............................. end [...] > I think that all of them should just export the python block, right? I don't think so. #+include: file src python means that file is really a python file, whose contents are going to be enclosed in a Python source code block. So Res 2 and Res 3 are not meaningful in that case; you cannot apply link search syntax to non-Org files. > Also, I think that it would be very useful to have something like this: > > another-file.org > .............................. > * Fancy header 1 > > #+NAME: blk1 > #+begin_src python :exports none > > print(2) #+end_src > > #+RESULTS: : 2 > > ** Fancy subheader 2 > > Res 1 > > #+include: "this-file.org::blk1" src python :exports both > .............................. end > > > Which would allow to have the =#+include= override the =:exports= > directive from the original block and get the results from the block. "Include" is an export-only directive, which is not the case of :exports. They live in two different worlds, and I think it is a good thing to keep them orthogonal. You may be looking after Babel calls. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
