Hello,
Marco Wahl writes:
> I have no idea for a cleaner implementation of these tests. AFAICS
> these tests look good (and also your code.) If someone has a better
> idea for the tests they can be changed.
I don't.
> I would drop test
>
> #v+
> ;; non-existent name
> (should-not
> (execut
>>> The test uses lines like:
>>>
>>> (execute-kbd-macro "\M-xorg-babel-goto-named-src-block\n\n")
>>>
>>> to emulate interactive usage.
>>>
>>> This feels like a hack, and the messages generated spill into my
>>> *shell* buffer when I run `make test'. If there is a cleaner way to
>>> do this
On Sun, 12 Jun 2016, Marco Wahl wrote:
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gmane.emacs.orgmode as well.
Hi Charles,
[...]
The test uses lines like:
(execute-kbd-macro "\M-xorg-babel-goto-named-src-block\n\n")
to emulate interactive usage.
Hi Charles,
> [...]
> The test uses lines like:
>
> (execute-kbd-macro "\M-xorg-babel-goto-named-src-block\n\n")
>
> to emulate interactive usage.
>
> This feels like a hack, and the messages generated spill into my
> *shell* buffer when I run `make test'. If there is a cleaner way to
> do
Hi all,
The revision a few months back of `org-babel-goto-named-src-block' broke
some of the interactive uses. I have fixed these in the attached patch.
Also, I provide an ERT test for those interactive uses --- filling in the
initial-input with the name of the symbol, results block name, #
