From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: link interfering with brackets when abbreviated Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2014 10:05:42 +0100 Message-ID: <87mwh9nf6h.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87ppm9sxoh.fsf@gmail.com> <87lhwxswby.fsf@gmail.com> <87ha7lsu5o.fsf@gmail.com> <8761o1n63t.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <8738j5snms.fsf@gmail.com> <87vbw11o3q.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87ppm8rgrf.fsf@gmail.com> <87lhwwgqe4.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <878uswqfzc.fsf@gmail.com> <87zjl9vjw4.wl@dns1.atmark-techno.com> <87ha7hpt6l.fsf@gmail.com> <87wqgdv48n.wl@dns1.atmark-techno.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51238) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WK2Kz-0004h1-9T for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 04:05:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WK2Ks-0001wV-Od for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 04:05:33 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::230]:57540) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WK2Ks-0001wH-I4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 04:05:26 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id hi5so2237198wib.15 for ; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 01:05:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87wqgdv48n.wl@dns1.atmark-techno.com> (Yasushi SHOJI's message of "Sun, 02 Mar 2014 09:22:32 +0900") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Yasushi SHOJI Cc: bzg@altern.org, michael.ch.brand@gmail.com, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Yasushi SHOJI writes: > At Sat, 01 Mar 2014 21:20:18 +0100, > Nicolas Goaziou wrote: >> >> This is not a sufficient reason. We are discussing a minor feature. >> Removing it doesn't remove any functionality to Org, as the "thing" just >> saves a few keystrokes, on a good day. > > Ok. If this is yet another bickshed, I'll drop from the discussion. This whole thread is about bikeshedding, no "if" involved. Though, I'm struggling to get a constructive discussion. I asked a couple of times already in what cases that feature was useful, in order to understand what some users were missing. I even gave examples about the inconsistencies in the previous implementation. And all I got so far was drama. >> Now consider the following case, where point is before the "a": >> >> [[link1]] a very ... very long line of text [[link2]] >> >> The previous behaviour implied to also open "link2". This is not >> really straightforward. > > If the point is before the "a", that means the point is right after > the link, it should open `link1' instead of `link2', IMNSHO. This > isn't even the previous behavior, I admit, ... which is my point: the previous behaviour was wrong. > but if you move the pointer to the end of the line (that's right after > the link2), it _opened_ links2. This behavior works quite well with > Emacs' cursor movement. The rewrite did it a few commits ago, but then I was asked to ignore white spaces after a link, which include the first position after the link. I agree I should make a special case here. > ;; uga, `forward-word' doesn't work as I expected on > ;; [[http://google.com][google]]. It stops at the first `o'. I do not understand this. >> Worse, if `visual-line-mode' is on, >> [[link2]] can be many lines below. In the following case, with point >> still before the first "a", opening [[link2]] is just odd: >> >> [[link1]] a very ... very long line >> which spans over many visual lines >> of text [[link2]]. >> >> It is odd because in the same situation, without `visual-line-mode' but >> with `auto-fill-mode' on, C-c C-o will report "No link found". > > Both should report "No link found". `org-end-of-line' takes care of > `visual-line-mode', why not `org-open-at-link'? I don't know. I just remark that the previous implementation didn't take care of `visual-line-mode'. Again, I'm asking to think again the "feature" because it is ill-defined and doesn't make sense at the moment. Without a correct specification, it is not worth re-implementing. With examples, I could understand the real scope involved (even though your message gives me indications about it) and the type of links we're talking about (it is easy and quite cheap to find the next link of a given type, much expensive to look after every possible type). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou