Hi Eric,
> Andreas Leha <andreas.l...@med.uni-goettingen.de> writes: > >> Hi Eric, >> >>> Andreas Leha <andreas.l...@med.uni-goettingen.de> writes: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I am getting different results from the evaluation of a source block and >>>> the evaluation of a #+call line to that block. >>>> >>>> Therefore, my question: Is there an equivalent to >>>> org-babel-expand-src-block (C-c C-v v) for #+call lines? >>>> >>>> Or more general: How do I debug #+call lines? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Andreas >>>> >>> >>> Can you provide a minimal example? >>> >>> You could write a code block equivalent to the call line. E.g., >>> >>> #+call: foo(bar=1) >>> >>> is equivalent to >>> >>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp :var results=foo(bar=1) >>> results >>> #+end_src >> >> Thanks for following this up. I found the problem in my case: The >> header argument ':colnames yes' was missing from the call line, such that >> the passed variables were different. (I've fallen into that trap >> repeatedly, but do not learn, as it seems...) >> >> It would have been a lot easier to find this, if I had had the possibility >> to do C-c C-v v on the call line to get the chance to step through the >> (R-) code that is evaluated. Without this, it took me some time to >> figure things out. >> >> So the question still stands: Is there the possibility to see what is >> actually executed with a call line, similar to C-c C-v v on a source >> block? >> > > There is no body to expand in a call line so C-c C-v v would have > nothing to show. You can however jump to the related code block and > call C-c C-v v there. This process could be made faster by wrapping the > org-babel-goto-named-src-block and org-babel-expand-src-block functions > into a single function. > > >> >> For a small example consider: >> >> --- >> #+name: foo >> | bar | >> | baz | >> | bam | >> >> #+call: testblock[:var a=foo]() :colnames yes >> >> #+name: testblock >> #+begin_src R :var a=foo :colnames yes >> a <- a[,1] >> data.frame(x=a) >> #+end_src >> --- >> >> Regards, >> Andreas >> >> Thanks for the confirmation, that there is no possibility to expand a #+call line. I know, that I can jump to the code block and expand that one (quite fast with C-c C-v g RET C-c C-v v), but that is exactly *not* what I was looking for. Because then, the header arguments to the source code block will apply instead of the header arguments to the #+call line. I was hoping for a C-c C-v v on #+call lines, which would spare me from modifying the source block's header arguments. But it is not a pressing issue, just my laziness (and bad coding perhaps). Regards, Andreas
