From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: [babel] confusion about org-confirm-babel-evaluate Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:17 -0400 Message-ID: <14771.1281631097@gamaville.dokosmarshall.org> References: <87r5i4ng9m.wl%ucecesf@ucl.ac.uk> <13118.1281622543@gamaville.dokosmarshall.org> <4C640E1A.2090002@ccbr.umn.edu> Reply-To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53851 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OjanZ-0002UL-CV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OjanY-0008A1-0n for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:33 -0400 Received: from vms173013pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.13]:44693) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OjanX-00089n-Tc for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:38:31 -0400 Received: from gamaville.dokosmarshall.org ([unknown] [12.198.177.3]) by vms173013.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0L7100IO2SVTF350@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net> for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:38:18 -0500 (CDT) In-reply-to: Message from Erik Iverson of "Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:07:06 CDT." <4C640E1A.2090002@ccbr.umn.edu> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Erik Iverson Cc: nicholas.dokos@hp.com, org-mode mailing list Erik Iverson wrote: > > > > Am I missing something? > > org-babel-confirm-evaluate is a function. > org-confirm-babel-evaluate is a variable. > I got that much, but I was expecting the return value of the function to make a difference... > > evaluation-confirmed is the result of evaluating the > org-babel-confirm-evaluate function. So even though the > /result/ of that function isn't used yet, the function is still > called. That function uses the value of org-confirm-babel-evaluate > to decide to prompt the user or not. So, as of now, > setting org-confirm-babel-evaluate to t or nil definitely has an > effect. ... but of course in this case, the function never returns in the no-confirm case. Thanks for setting me straight! Nick