From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Eglen <S.J.Eglen@damtp.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Handling Repeating events from google calendar / repeater
 interval
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 10:08:30 +0100
Message-ID: <85zjtwnlrl.fsf@damtp.cam.ac.uk>
References: <85k3l1nljo.fsf@damtp.cam.ac.uk> <m21u79xd01.fsf@gmail.com>
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 ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54769)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <S.J.Eglen@damtp.cam.ac.uk>) id 1UwUQz-0003nd-Sq
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 05:42:11 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <S.J.Eglen@damtp.cam.ac.uk>) id 1UwUQy-0003ax-Gt
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 05:42:09 -0400
Received: from ppsw-32.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.132]:54974)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <S.J.Eglen@damtp.cam.ac.uk>) id 1UwTuS-0000OG-Qj
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 05:08:32 -0400
In-reply-to: <m21u79xd01.fsf@gmail.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: Guido Van Hoecke <guivho@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Stephen Eglen <S.J.Eglen@damtp.cam.ac.uk>

> Correct me if I am wrong, but I'm afraid that pure AWK does not provide
> date computation support. That's why I did not implement this.
okay, it does sound like a lot to ask awk to do.

> So I would definitely vote to extend the repeater syntax with a count.

great.

> I assume that your initial example RRULE would require either "...4+1d>"
> or "+1d:4"

Yes, thanks.

Stephen