From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guido Van Hoecke Subject: Re: Handling Repeating events from google calendar / repeater interval Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:42:13 +0200 Message-ID: References: <85k3l1nljo.fsf@damtp.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39192) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V4cHw-00043G-QU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:42:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V4cHq-0000X1-82 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:42:24 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::230]:49037) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V4cHq-0000WK-1V for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:42:18 -0400 Received: by mail-ee0-f48.google.com with SMTP id l10so555893eei.7 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:42:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Neil Smithline's message of "Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:45:34 -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: Neil Smithline Cc: Org Mode , Stephen Eglen Neil Smithline writes: > On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Guido Van Hoecke > wrote: > > > > Correct me if I am wrong, but I'm afraid that pure AWK does not > provide date computation support. Apparently I was not very awake when I wrote that. Awk could be used to increment dates by n days, weeks, moths or years. But this would only be needed if we want / need to turn iCal RRULE events with COUNT specifier into COUNT separate org events (trying to circumvent the lack of such a COUNT specifier in org repeating dates). So although it is feasable, I'm still not sure it is the proper way to go. However, I am willing to implement it if needed / desired. > So I would definitely vote to extend the repeater syntax with a > count. I still think that this is the correct approach. > PS: You crazy kids and your lack of respect for antiquated UNIX > utilities ;-) Oooch, that hurts this crazy 66 year old kid :) Guido -- Expect the worst, it's the least you can do.