Dear all,

Thanks for your kind reply! Sorry that I didn't have chance to check till
now.

OKay, I added the function:

(defun sx-org-revert-agenda-buffers ()
  (interactive)
  (mapcar
   (lambda (file)
     (let ((revert-without-query '(".*\.org$")))
       (find-file file)
       (revert-buffer)))
   (org-agenda-files t)))

It works ! Thanks a lot!

Xin



On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On 25 jul 2012, at 17:39, Nick Dokos wrote:
> >
> >> ...
> >> On the OP's question, I'd prefer a more targeted solution: something
> >> like this should work (very lightly tested - check the doc for
> >> revert-without-query if you want to modify the regexp):
> >>
> >> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> >> (defun xin-shi-org-revert-agenda-buffers ()
> >> (interactive)
> >> (mapcar
> >>  (lambda (file)
> >>    (let ((revert-without-query '(".*\.org$")))
> >>      (find-file file)
> >>      (revert-buffer)))
> >>  org-agenda-files))
> >> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> >
> >
> > The variable org-agenda-files can also contain directories.  Therefore
> > you should use the function call
> >
> >   (org-agenda-files t)
> >
> > to get a list of the files.  The t means, even if the agenda
> > is currently restricted, get all files.
> >
>
> Thanks - I forgot all about that.
>
> > Another improvement to this function would be to limit it
> > to files currently visited - but I guess this is a minor issue
> > as the next agenda command will visit all those files anyway.
> >
>
> Yes, I thought about that and decided it wasn't worth worrying about.
> As Kernighan and Plauger say: first get it right, then make it fast; and
> as we just saw, it wasn't right :-). But for typical setups - a few
> files or a few dozen files - I don't think it's going to make much
> difference. OTOH, if one has thousands of agenda files, then one
> probably has much worse problems than this.
>
>
>
> Uhhh, yes, indeed!
>
> - Carsten
>
> Nick
>