From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tftorrey@tftorrey.com (T.F. Torrey)
Subject: Re: Dynamic blocks in the new exporter
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:15:42 -0700
Message-ID: <87ip5ti5pt.fsf@lapcat.tftorrey.com>
References: <867gm98erq.fsf@somewhere.org>
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]:42102)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <tftorrey@gmail.com>) id 1U6Tuw-0006qp-Ld
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:38:08 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <tftorrey@gmail.com>) id 1U6Tuu-0001Lf-Gf
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:38:06 -0500
Received: from mail-pb0-f48.google.com ([209.85.160.48]:37233)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <tftorrey@gmail.com>) id 1U6Tuu-0001LH-9Y
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:38:04 -0500
Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id wy12so783603pbc.35
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2013 14:38:02 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <867gm98erq.fsf@somewhere.org> (wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com)
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: Sebastien Vauban <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hello Seb,

"Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:

> Hello T.F.,
>
> T.F. Torrey wrote:
>> Does the new export framework impose new restrictions on or change the
>> functionality of dynamic blocks?
>
> I've used them quite extensively today. Did not notice anything wrong.
>
> What are you trying to tell us?

I was merely inquiring to understand my options.

Before the new exporter, I converted my more complex macros to dynamic
blocks.  They are very handy, and I'm already familiar with implementing
them.

Now I'm deciding the best way to replace macros that no longer work.  I
didn't want to begin porting macros to dynamic blocks only to find out
that they had also been pared down in favor of babel.

Thanks for the prompt reply.

Best regards,
Terry
-- 
T.F. Torrey