From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Eric Schulte" <schulte.eric@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Closing #+results: with #+end declaration?
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:00:28 -0700
Message-ID: <877hcl9rep.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <808vxv23j2.fsf@missioncriticalit.com> <m11v3npufp.fsf@gmail.com>
	<80mxm9yulk.fsf@missioncriticalit.com> <87sjvj6oul.fsf@gmail.com>
	<80y654nq9a.fsf@somewhere.org> <87zkpjfwew.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87hbbqepgz.fsf@altern.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45441 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ptmr8-0008Hi-QQ
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:04:39 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <schulte.eric@gmail.com>) id 1Ptmr5-0006zO-LQ
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:04:38 -0500
Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:47398)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <schulte.eric@gmail.com>) id 1Ptmr5-0006zK-HA
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:04:35 -0500
Received: by iwl42 with SMTP id 42so3360360iwl.0
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:04:35 -0800 (PST)
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Bastien <bzg@altern.org>
Cc: =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=A9bastien?= Vauban <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Bastien <bzg@altern.org> writes:

> Hi Eric,
>
> "Eric Schulte" <schulte.eric@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> #+begin_src sh :results list
>>   echo "eric schulte"
>>   echo "dan davison"
>>   echo "seb vauban"
>> #+end_src
>>
>> #+results:
>> - ("eric" "schulte")
>> - ("dan" "davison")
>> - ("seb" "vauban")
>
> reading this, I wonder if we should consider use this instead:
>
> #+results:
> - ("eric" "schulte")
> - ("dan" "davison")
> - ("seb" "vauban")
> #+end
>
> or better:
>
> #+begin_results
> - ("eric" "schulte")
> - ("dan" "davison")
> - ("seb" "vauban")
> #+end_results
>
> Looks more consistent with the rest of the #+begin* statements.
>

This has come up before, and there are now options which allow wrapping
of results, e.g.,

#+begin_src emacs-lisp :results wrap :exports both
  (mapcar (lambda (el) (list el (+ 1 (* el el)))) (number-sequence 0 10))
#+end_src

#+results:
#+BEGIN_RESULT
|  0 |   1 |
|  1 |   2 |
|  2 |   5 |
|  3 |  10 |
|  4 |  17 |
|  5 |  26 |
|  6 |  37 |
|  7 |  50 |
|  8 |  65 |
|  9 |  82 |
| 10 | 101 |
#+END_RESULT

I've just added documentation of the "wrap" header argument to the
manual.

>
> More generally, I've sometimes wondered why we need to use
>
> #+begin_*
> #+end_*
>
> instead of just
>
> #+begin_*
> #+end
>
> Unless we allow nested #+begin blocks (and AFAIK we don't), there 
> is no real need for being specific about what #+end ends.
>
> What do you think?

I agree that (possibly aside from clarity) there is no real need for the
end block to specify its type.  However as I use helper methods
(e.g. yasnippets) for all block creation, then extra characters
represent no real typing burden.

Best -- Eric