Re: Patch for numbering continuation in source blocks.

[Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>]

Hi Niels,

is the purpose of this patch to be able to insert an unnumbered code block
between two numbered ones and to continue the numbering from the first in the third?

- Carsten

On 2.10.2011, at 12:40, Niels Giesen wrote:

> NOTE: I have tried earlier to send this patch with git send-email,
>  but apparently failed; here's a new, inlined attempt.
> 
>  The documentation for numbering source code blocks says:
> 
> #+begin_quote
> If you use a `+n' switch, the numbering from the previous
> numbered snippet will be continued in the current one.
> #+end_quote
> 
>  But that is not exactly what happens; what happens is that the
> numbering from the previous snippet will be continued in the current
> one. That is, when the previous snippet is numbered its numbering will
> continue, but if there is a previous numbered snippet A with, say, 14
> lines followed by an unnumbered snippet B followed by a numbered
> snippet C, then the numbers for C will start at 1, regardless of the +
> in the +n switch, whereas my reading of the documentation leads me to
> think it ought to continue at 15, disregarding the presence any
> unnumbered sections in between.
> 
> Reason for me for the +n switch to comply with (my reading of) the
> documentation is that I would like to document a long, line-numbered,
> function but intersperse it with short code samples without line
> numbering that explain parts of the long function.
> 
> This patch of course may break existing org files where +n was
> specified but -n intended.
> 
> #+begin_src diff
>  From 4d34d5f2fe10a956d3359dfd40f19de25202df5f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>  From: Niels Giesen <niels.giesen@gmail.com>
>  Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:22:47 +0200
>  Subject: [PATCH] Continue numbering from any previous numbered snippet with +n, even when previous numbered snippet does not immediately precede it.
> 
>  ,* org-mode/lisp/org-exp.el (org-export-number-lines):
> 
>    Check whether number parameter (this is a numbered block!) is
>    non-nil as well as whether cont is nil (this numbered block should
>    *not* continue numbering where we left off before!) before resetting
>    the count to zero.
> 
>    From the docs:
> 
>      If you use a `+n' switch, the numbering from the previous
>      numbered snippet will be continued in the current one.
> 
>    With this change I believe the code complies with the docs.
>  ---
>   lisp/org-exp.el |    2 +-
>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
>  diff --git a/lisp/org-exp.el b/lisp/org-exp.el
>  index 9884a31..12590e1 100644
>  --- a/lisp/org-exp.el
>  +++ b/lisp/org-exp.el
>  @@ -2731,7 +2731,7 @@ INDENT was the original indentation of the block."
>   (defun org-export-number-lines (text &optional skip1 skip2 number cont
>                       replace-labels label-format)
>     (setq skip1 (or skip1 0) skip2 (or skip2 0))
>  -  (if (not cont) (setq org-export-last-code-line-counter-value 0))
>  +  (if (and number (not cont)) (setq org-export-last-code-line-counter-value 0))
>     (with-temp-buffer
>       (insert text)
>       (goto-char (point-max))
>  -- 
>  1.7.4.1
> 
> 
> #+end_src
> 
> Regards,
> niels
> --
> http://pft.github.com
>