2013ko martxoak 8an, Eric Schulte-ek idatzi zuen: > > I would agree. I don't believe *any* changes should take place in the > buffer when a code block is executed with ":results none".
A common use case for me is to use a babel block to load a large dataset into R. I want this to be cached, in the sense that I want it not to be run again (by e.g. C-c C-v C-b) unless the code changes. But I also don’t want to see its result in the (mini)buffer. Is there a way to accommodate this usage of the cache functionality? > I prefer leaving the hash with the results, as it is the results which > are "hashed". Also, same input does not always guarantee same output, > e.g., > > #+begin_src sh > date > #+end_src In this case, the code block shouldn’t be marked :cache. Unless the desired (and odd, IMO) behavior is to have a datestamp that is only updated when the user forcibly re-evaluates the block (with C-u C-c C-c). Also, with regard to: > The hyphen should only be required for multi-word functions, e.g., > `listp' has no hyphen but `hash-table-p' does have a hyphen. The context surrounding this code binds cache-p; the lack of a hyphen was just a typo in the patch. I agree that cachep is more idiomatic (in fact, that is what led to the typo), but I tried to make the smallest possible patch to address my intention. -- Aaron Ecay
