Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> Hello, > > Andreas Leha <andreas.l...@med.uni-goettingen.de> writes: > >> Is that a valid feature request: >> Allow the combination of :results raw and :results replace -- regardless >> of the produced content? >> >> IIUC the parser does not allow this right now. But (without any >> knowledge on the parser) I can imagine >> 'special' results drawers that do not have any function/effect other than >> delimiting babel results (plus possibly folding). >> If these existed, I would even enable them by default no matter of 'raw' >> or not. > > No matter how special the results drawer is, it cannot (and shouldn't) > contain headlines. > You are the master of the parser... > There are a few options to mark raw output even with headlines: > > 1. Use text properties to mark the part of the buffer generated by > a given source block. The main drawback is that Org is not just > plain text anymore (some information is hidden and cannot be found > just looking at the text). > > 2. Use comment cookies around the area: > > # Raw Babel Output : src-name (begin) > * Some headline > # Raw Babel Output : src-name (end) > > This is not very pretty. Also, it may be difficult to handle > overlapping changes around the same region. > > OTOH, headlines are the only limitation to raw+replace behaviour. Some > decent workarounds to this problem were offered in this thread. We can > also live with it. > IIUC, you are saying that raw+replace is possible right now for any content in the results (other than headlines), if the results are in a drawer? Then, my follow-up question is simply, why are drawers not the default for results, then? Is there any drawback (apart from an additional line)? Regards, Andreas
