From: Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us>
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Sloppy `org-element-context'?
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 22:34:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r45njpgp.fsf@pank.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874n2jsls9.fsf@gmail.com>
Hi,
Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
> As you may know, `org-element-context' returns the object under point,
> according to Org Syntax. The questions are: should it be a little
> sloppy, for convenience? And, if it should, what degree of sloppiness is
> acceptable?
Would it make sense to make it optional? For my personal hacks, I
much prefer to work with an element, if possible, and flexibility
could facility fast and easy hacks. On the other hand in Org-core
clarity and strictness is (probably) preferable. So something like
this
(let (org-element-strict) (FUN (org-element-context) ...)).
> Note that, at the time being, the function is already somewhat sloppy,
> because it will return an object right before point. In the following
> example, "|" is point. Even though it is not on the bold object,
> evaluating (org-element-context) there will give:
>
> "*bold*| text" => (bold ...)
> Should we go further? A recent discussion about opening links in node
> properties suggests that some users expect to encounter Org syntax
> there. I believe this is not generally desirable.
I haven't seen this discussion. I looked briefly at the suggested
patch; I don't understand why it would be necessary or desirable. But
I will not rule out that I have yet to consider the correct case!
> Anyway, here we are. I think it is important to define clearly what
> belongs to the syntax (I think it is quite good at the moment), what can
> be allowed for the sake of convenience, and what line should never be
> crossed (I firmly believe, for example, that `org-element-context'
> should never return objects in a comment, an example block, or
> a fixed-width area).
As a user I have no problems with the syntax.
As a hacker (not quite a developer!), I do at time desire more
flexibility with org-context to temporarily evaluating an element
under alternative assumptions of its properties. A recent example
evaluate $x^{z}$ as-if it isn't a latex-fragment.
—Rasmus
--
This space is left intentionally blank
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-27 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-27 15:28 Nicolas Goaziou
2014-03-27 21:34 ` Rasmus [this message]
2014-03-28 9:26 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-04-19 8:47 ` Bastien
2014-04-19 9:15 ` Nicolas Richard
2014-04-19 9:30 ` Bastien
2014-04-23 20:35 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-04-29 21:20 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-05-06 9:25 ` Bastien
2014-05-26 15:50 ` Bastien
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87r45njpgp.fsf@pank.eu \
--to=rasmus@gmx.us \
--cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
--subject='Re: [RFC] Sloppy `org-element-context'\''?' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).