From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Lundin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Removed unecessary invocations of org-agenda-show. Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:22:13 -0400 Message-ID: <878w329v2i.fsf@archdesk.localdomain> References: <87zkvly3m3.fsf@archdesk.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60902 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ow5zH-0004s3-EK for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:22:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ow5zF-0007NN-JY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:22:19 -0400 Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:55575) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ow5zF-0007NJ-BO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:22:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Carsten Dominik's message of "Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:35:21 +0200") 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: Carsten Dominik Cc: org-mode List Hi Carsten, Carsten Dominik writes: > On Sep 13, 2010, at 6:48 PM, Matt Lundin wrote: > >> >> lisp/org-agenda.el (org-agenda-set-tags): Remove org-agenda-show to >> prevent >> disrupting windows and changing point in original buffer. >> (org-agenda-set-property): Same >> (org-agenda-set-effort): Same >> (org-agenda-toggle-archive-tag): Same >> >> When setting a tag in the agenda, org-mode displays the corresponding >> entry in the original org buffer by calling org-agenda-show. This has >> the unwelcome side-effect of disrupting the current window arrangement >> and changing the position of the point in the original buffer. This >> behavior is inconsistent with the that of org-agenda-todo, which makes >> all its changes "silently." > > I agree, but I am sure I used to have problems with something > which is why this was added. > Have you been running this patch for some time already? > Without any problems like the agenda jumping to a wrong place in a org > file or so? I haven't yet encountered any deleterious side effects, but I agree that this patch needs further consideration. I will do some additional research/testing and return with a report. :) Best, Matt