Re: Is the usage of "longtable" hard-coded into current Pandoc?

[John MacFarlane <jgm-TVLZxgkOlNX2fBVCVOL8/A@public.gmane.org>]

+++ kurt.pfeifle-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org [Jul 04 15 11:41 ]:
>   It occurred to me that what I had thought of previously may not work:
>   modifying the LaTeX template to not use `longtable`, but another
>   package instead and get classoption `twocolumn` to work.
>   This may be because the LaTeX  "micro code" (my name for it) for tables
>   may not work when simply loading a different table package. Is this
>   assumption correct?

Correct, use of longtable is hard coded.  This is quite
unfortunate, and I've long been wanting a better alternative
that will work with 2-column text but also break across
pages when needed.  Haven't found one yet.

Failing that, it may be worth having an option for regular
tables.

>   Do I indeed have to resort into writing my own raw LaTeX code if I want
>   tables in two-column output?

It's probably possible to redefine the longtable environment
to something else in your preamble.