RFC: the patch to `org-babel-remove-inline-result-one-or-many' removes inline results, too. Do you see any bad consequences? On Fri, 30 Jan 2015, Daniele Pizzolli wrote: > Hello Charles, > > "Charles C. Berry" writes: > >> On Fri, 30 Jan 2015, Daniele Pizzolli wrote: >> [discussion of extra whitespace bug deleted] There is now a bugfix on master. I've also added 'interactive' to `org-babel-remove-inline-result'. > >>> Is there a way to evaluate a buffer an then remove inline results or >>> better, to get the very same buffer after: > Yes. See attached patch which should clean *all* results (except `raw' results) from a buffer when `org-babel-remove-result-one-or-many' is called with a prefix. Before pushing this, I'd like some feedback on the wisdom of doing what the patch does. >>> Wwhy not have also >>> org-babel-remove-inline-result-one-or-many and >>> org-babel-remove-all-result-one-or-many to remove all the babel result >>> with one function call? >> >> Easy enough, but is this really needed? What about call block/line >> results? > > This is useful for me because I want to easily discard the results to > have the commit with only the changes in the source. I hope others find > this a reasonable facility. It is like a 'make clean' for your org > files. I think extending `org-babel-remove-all-result-one-or-many' to cover inline results is innocuous. So if nobody raises an objection, I will push the patch. I got that you want to clean up your buffer. But an issue with adding more functions is 'feature bloat'. If you really need `org-babel-remove-result-all' and `org-babel-remove-inline-result-one-or-many' you can have private functions. > > Patch attached. Thank you. Regarding patches, if you haven't signed FSF copyright papers a TINYCHANGE is needed in the commit message. > I am not sure about the default of discarding keyword > Deleting the result line can cause some disorder, but it is the default > in org-babel-remove-result. Also the naming can be confusing. Alas. Then there is the user error I have made of re-using names. Best, Chuck