From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: 8.3.1 bug or misunderstanding -- inline archive Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:59:53 +0200 Message-ID: <87vbc8onra.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <877fopcqa9.fsf@kyleam.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41457) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZSkxd-00078z-7K for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:58:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZSkxb-0000FC-NQ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:58:17 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::196]:34303) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZSkxb-0000F1-H1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 07:58:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <877fopcqa9.fsf@kyleam.com> (Kyle Meyer's message of "Thu, 20 Aug 2015 22:46:06 -0400") 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: Kyle Meyer Cc: Hymie! , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Kyle Meyer writes: > Hymie! writes: > >> I have a few items in my org file that are tagged "ARCHIVE". They show up >> grey in my emacs window. >> >> If I sit the cursor on the * bullet and hit TAB, I get a message that says >> "Subtree is archived and stays closed. Use to cycle it anyway." >> >> However, if I sit the cursor on the actual headline and hit TAB, I get the >> same message, but the subtree is also expanded. >> >> I don't recall offhand how it worked in 8.2.x, but I'm pretty sure it >> refused to expand the subtree no matter where the cursor was. > > Yes, you're correct. This behavior was introduced by 389274c ("Fix > `org-hide-archived-subtrees'", 2014-12-16). The issue is that the new > regexp is anchored at the start of the heading, but the argument BEG is > not necessarily at the beginning of the line. Indeed. Fixed. Thanks to you both. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou