From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf-geNee64TY+gS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: About commit named "Allow multi-line properties to be specified
 in property blocks"
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 10:31:28 +0100
Message-ID: <80d3d3neof.fsf@somewhere.org>
References: <87vcr5c76e.fsf@gmail.com> <87vcr5j5a5.fsf@gmail.com>
	<4EAF118C.8050806@christianmoe.com> <87hb2mo7ek.fsf@altern.org>
	<87obwuh19t.fsf@gmail.com> <87hb2mdmi9.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87obwtgip9.fsf@gmail.com> <87sjm5ez0f.fsf@gmail.com>
	<CAGhLh6Gi=-3ytwJiLEQf8B03oDrNP+uoMFHNX=WptYheTxxfqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4eb42564.059dec0a.5ffc.7ff5@mx.google.com> <877h3felm2.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87ty6ffuu6.fsf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org>
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-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org
To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org

Hi Eric,

(Due to a high "buzyness" level, I've been a bit out of the discussion for one
week or so)

Eric Schulte wrote:
> The attached patch implements this latest "propname+" suggestion.  When
> applied it results in the behavior shown below.
>
> I'm inclined to go with this as a solution moving forward.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> #+property: var    foo=1
> #+property: var+ , bar=2
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (+ foo bar)
> #+end_src

So, in a way, adding the + after `var' is how you tell Org that this is an
accumulated property?

Two questions:

1. Why not the + after the property keyword (property+)? I guess because it's
   more against other aspects of Org internals?  Anyway, putting + after the
   var sounds as right to me -- maybe better even if we consider that you
   declare var as accumulated, writing so.

2. Must there be a first `var' without `+'?  Accepted, tolerated or wrong?  I
   mean, I'm sure that, due to heavy file editing, we'll sometimes have:

   #+property: var+   foo=1
   #+property: var+ , bar=2
   #+begin_src emacs-lisp
     (+ foo bar)
   #+end_src

> #+results:
> : 3
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (org-entry-get (point) "var" t)
> #+end_src
>
> #+results:
> : foo=1, bar=2
>
> * overwriting a file-wide property
>   :PROPERTIES:
>   :var:      foo=7
>   :END:
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   foo
> #+end_src
>
> #+results:
> : 7
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (org-entry-get (point) "var" t)
> #+end_src
>
> #+results:
> : foo=7
>
> * appending to a file-wide property
>   :PROPERTIES:
>   :var+:      , baz=3
>   :END:

To be honest, the only thing that I dislike is the comma in the above line.
Not intuitive at all. Quite hard to read.

Can't the comma be implicitly added by the `+' after the property name?

That would allow one to simply write:

   * appending to a file-wide property
     :PROPERTIES:
     :var+:        baz=3
     :END:

and have the correct values.

> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (+ foo bar baz)
> #+end_src
>
> #+results:
> : 6
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (org-entry-get (point) "var" t)
> #+end_src
>
> #+results:
> : foo=1, bar=2, baz=3

Thanks.

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban