Daniel Kraus <dan...@kraus.my> writes:
> The problem is that or :results value (/the default) I only want the
> result of the last expression and I do that `binding` of stdout to surpress
> all other output.
> But I guess during tangle this should just be ignored?
> Is there a simple way to find out if `org-babel-execute:clojure` is
> executed or tangled?
You can just move this extra logic arranging :results to
org-babel-execute:clojure.
> If it should be ignored on tangle, what about the :var defines.
:var defines are affecting how the code is written. :results should not.
So, :var is expected to affect tangling.
If necessary, code block expansion can be disabled via :no-expand header
argument:
By default Org expands code blocks during tangling. The ‘no-expand’
header argument turns off such expansions. Note that one side-effect of
expansion by ‘org-babel-expand-src-block’ also assigns values (see *note
Environment of a Code Block::) to variables. Expansions also replace
noweb references with their targets (see *note Noweb Reference
Syntax::). Some of these expansions may cause premature assignment,
hence this option. This option makes a difference only for tangling.
It has no effect when exporting since code blocks for execution have to
be expanded anyway.
> We recently discussed this for ob-scheme where there was a problem with the
> `let` wrapper.
> Is it ok or expected that a the tangled code is wrapped in a let block?
> Should I change it to a global `def`?
I think that keeping `let' should be fine as long as it does not break
things. In the previous discussion, the whole issue was that `let' was
not always safe in that particular lisp dialect.
We just need to make sure that it is documented.
--
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
