From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Schulte <schulte.eric@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: org-babel: two confirmations for org/HTML "macro"?
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:37:27 -0600
Message-ID: <87fvyvcqzk.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <890A187B-1139-49F9-AF3C-581B5DA49BED@nf.mpg.de>
	<87sj2yed7d.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87k3oaw7jz.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
	<87d2u2yn77.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87obdlbq0b.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
	<87d2u1v4rn.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
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 ([208.118.235.92]:41573)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <schulte.eric@gmail.com>) id 1UQmeU-0001oJ-3A
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:41:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <schulte.eric@gmail.com>) id 1UQmeS-0008FW-MT
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:41:02 -0400
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: Bastien <bzg@gnu.org>
Cc: Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de>, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi Achim,
>
> Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> writes:
>
>> Bastien writes:
>>> (Sorry, I pushed a fix for the compiler warning that your patch also
>>> solves.)
>>
>> Not in master, though?
>
> Yes -- pushed this morning.
>
>>> Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> writes:
>>>
>>>> Since the test suite doesn't really test confirmation at all, it would
>>>> be nice if someone with a good variety of Babel calls could check if the
>>>> number of confirmations stay the same with and without the patch.  I
>>>> don't think I have test cases that cover all possible combinations.
>>>
>>> Please let's go and apply this, that's the best way to have more
>>> people testing it.  Thanks!
>>
>> Please wait for Eric to chime in.
>
> All right.  Copying Eric for the heads-up.
>

After walking through this patch, it looks like it provides exactly the
correct behavior.  Please go ahead and apply these changes.

Thanks Achim for the patch!

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte