From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Re: function for inserting a block Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:43:40 -0700 Message-ID: <87r2u1cuwj.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <877exghblx.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87efromccg.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87ziabepxt.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87bmml2fb0.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87fubuzpsa.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <874lsabdop.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87vak1l11m.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87r2uoc4q7.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87bmllk5xy.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <878tgmwwsa.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87po9q2e8k.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87tvyyvpst.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87fuaiz069.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87lgk9eo4d.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87fuahxxvs.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50417) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4ZgT-0000eS-7t for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:45:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4ZgO-0002tq-Sy for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:45:57 -0400 Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=49252 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e4ZgO-0002pN-Lg for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:45:52 -0400 Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e4Zfv-0001ZU-9f for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Oct 2017 23:45:23 +0200 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" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Eric Abrahamsen writes: > >> I'm still not quite seeing this. This chunk should take care of it: >> >> (goto-char e) >> (if (bolp) >> (progn >> (skip-chars-backward " \n\t") >> (forward-line)) >> (end-of-line) >> (insert "\n")) >> >> If "e" is EOB, we do `end-of-line' and insert a newline, it should be >> taken care of. I added a new clause in the test for this case, and it >> seems to work fine... Am I missing anything? > > I don't think so. It looks correct, indeed. > > However, you sent the wrong patch. Could you send the updated patch > again? Ooof, maybe I need to take a little vacation from the computer. This should be the right one. Thanks, Eric