[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Confusion about org-confirm-babel-evaluate's behavior while exportin

From: Berry, Charles
Subject: Re: Confusion about org-confirm-babel-evaluate's behavior while exporting lob calls
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 17:17:16 +0000

Just on a whim, I changed `org-babel-exp-results' by deleting

  (let (org-confirm-babel-evaluate-NOT)

and the matching right parenthesis.

Now I get a single prompt to confirm evaluation using Ruiyang's ECM.


> On Oct 28, 2020, at 8:16 PM, Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com> wrote:
> 吴锐扬 writes:
>> The author explained his motivation for the commit in the mailing list 
>> before it got applied:
>>> That's because lob calls get wrapped internally in an anonymous
>>> emacs-lisp source block that then feeds through the result from the
>>> actual call as elisp.  The attached patch should suppress the
>>> confirmation for the wrapper call.  To the best of my knowledge nothing
>>> dangerous can happen with that evaluation and all confirmations for the
>>> call stack down from there have already taken place according to the
>>> users' setup.
> Just for reference: it looks like that's
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://orgmode.org/list/87k3oaw7jz.fsf@Rainer.invalid__;!!LLK065n_VXAQ!29k-PVwb9XnRUW2w0NBea_sA5uaG3P1Ck0lJ_EyddjelOaIrJGxmvvR28RAyZpjHiQ$
>> If I understand correctly, executing a lob call would trigger two user
>> confirmations in the past, and this commit was meant to suppress one
>> of the two confirmations. (I may be wrong since I am a fairly new user
>> of org mode.)
> Thanks for digging.  Indeed, if you go back to the parent of 56bf3d789
> (Babel: avoid superfluous confirmation for internal wrapper,
> 2013-04-10), there are two queries.  On that commit, there is one.
>> Now there is no confirmation at all. IMHO, there should be exactly
>> one confirmation ideally.
> It looks like the query went away with dbb375fdf (Simplify Babel calls
> evaluation, 2016-06-16), which was included in the 9.0 release.  Based
> on a quick glance at that commit, I don't think that was an intentional
> change.
> I won't take a closer look at this until at least this weekend, though.
> I'd be very happy if someone beat me to it.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]