From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: why not auto-renumbering list ? Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 08:56:03 +0200 Message-ID: <85E5FB19-8C5A-4436-AB89-65760B565C55@gmail.com> References: <87vd7mfvcx.wl%n.goaziou@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53410 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OiMfG-0001lc-Qu for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:20:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OiMfF-0005v1-JP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:20:54 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:48384) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OiMfF-0005qO-Dm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:20:53 -0400 Received: by mail-ew0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 28so3669407ewy.0 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 00:20:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87vd7mfvcx.wl%n.goaziou@gmail.com> 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: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: Org Mode List Hi Nicolas, On Aug 7, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > Hello, > > I'm still into lists, First, my apologies that I have so far not found the time to test your improved list implementation. I think this is a far-reaching change, which is why it needs careful testing before we apply it. I really hope to get to this soon. Have you had any testing feedback from anyone else so far? Have you tested it in all the export backends? > and I'm wondering about the global usefulness of > `org-auto-renumber-ordered-lists', provided that: > > - it isn't noticeably slower to renumber and fix a list than to simply > fix its indentation; > - you can use [@start:num] to enforce a special numbering; > - some actions on a list will renumber it whatever the value of this > variable is. > > So, I'd like to hear about other users. Do you set this variable to > nil? If so, what is your use case? I don't think anyone sets this to nil. But there is a use case for this, if someone wants some strange specific numbering, then it might be useful to allow turning it off. There is no harm in having this possibility. > If there's a need for decreasing numbers or numbers increasing by more > than one, I could add [@step:num] and [@start:num,@step:num] as > possibilities, but it looks a bit overkill to me. To me as well. > > Anyway, the idea behind this would be to: > > - remove `org-maybe-renumber-ordered-list', > - remove `org-maybe-renumber-ordered-list-safe', > - remove this variable, > - rename `org-fix-bullet-type' to `org-fix-bullet', > - call `org-fix-bullet' unconditionally when acting on a list instead > of having to decide if the function should renumber or simply fix > indentation. While this sounds reasonable - it also unnecessary to me. Why fix something that works? - Carsten