Michael Brand <michael.ch.br...@gmail.com> writes: > Hi Eric > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Eric Schulte <schulte.e...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I think we could be well served by discussing how people use call lines, >> how they would use call lines (if this behavior changed), and what >> behavior would best support these existing and potential use cases. > > You did not yet answer to what I asked you about more than one call > with the same arguments: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/72513/focus=73547 >
They will overwrite eachother's results. We are currently discussing alternatives which would change this behavior. > >> In defense of the existing behavior, I don't see the benefit of calling >> a code block with the same arguments from multiple locations and >> subsequently littering a file with multiple identical results blocks. > > Such result blocks do not have to be necessarily identical. What would > you suggest for these examples?: > > 1) It could be just me feeling like to be on the playground: > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > #+NAME: i_am_curious_how_this_works > #+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp > (format "%s" org-babel-current-src-block-location) > #+END_SRC > > #+CALL: i_am_curious_how_this_works() > > #+RESULTS: i_am_curious_how_this_works() > : #<marker at 124 in tmp.org> > #+CALL: i_am_curious_how_this_works() > > (Here I expect to see the result "#<marker at 235 in tmp.org>".) > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > This works as expected. Depending on the call line executed, I get different points in the second results. > > 2) My use case mentioned at the beginning of this message. > Currently if you want have separate results for call lines with the same variables you will need to use a dummy variable. I'd suggest an OS variable if you are running them on different operating systems. > > Michael -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
