From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Leha <andreas.leha@med.uni-goettingen.de>
Subject: Re: comment section with latex_header
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:02:40 +0000
Message-ID: <olumw2zxyj3.fsf@med.uni-goettingen.de>
References: <olulhipz45z.fsf@med.uni-goettingen.de>
	<87d23znv5a.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <55110E84.3060408@roklein.de>
	<87zj72n5xk.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <86d23y3gxi.fsf@example.com>
	<5512A024.5050509@roklein.de> <86k2y4b1gt.fsf@example.com>
	<olur3sbykle.fsf@med.uni-goettingen.de>
	<87lhijldia.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35013)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YbEva-0005DV-Af
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:02:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YbEvU-00067o-7f
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:02:58 -0400
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:38646)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YbEvU-00067U-1c
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:02:52 -0400
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YbEvA-0004Fm-F8
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:02:32 +0100
Received: from cpc33-cmbg15-2-0-cust4.5-4.cable.virginm.net ([81.102.136.5])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:02:32 +0100
Received: from andreas.leha by cpc33-cmbg15-2-0-cust4.5-4.cable.virginm.net
	with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 22:02:32 +0100
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> Andreas Leha <andreas.leha@med.uni-goettingen.de> writes:
>
>> FWIW, I agree that COMMENT should be equivalent to individual line # .
>
> I hope you mean it should be equivalent during export only. Otherwise,
> it would introduce some serious slowdown as COMMENT can be inherited.
>

I see.  I did not consider any possible slow-downs.  I'd expect COMMENT
to behave exactly like # in every regard -- not only export.  That is a
clearly defined behaviour, that should not produce confusion.

But I am not sure (hence my question below) whether there are use cases
that need different behaviour.

If COMMENT is only valid for export, then I would actually recommend
to rename it to make that clear.

>> Sections that should be accessible without being exported get
>> the :noexport: tag.
>>
>> Is there any usecase for COMMENTed sections that is not covered
>> by :noexport:?
>
> Babel code from a :noexport: headline is executed. It isn't when in
> a COMMENT headline. I think both are useful.

I completely agree.  My question was, what a use case would be that
requires a COMMENT that behaves different from #'ing the individual
lines (and is not covered by :noexport: already).

Regards,
Andreas