From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: org-map-entries doesn't understand deletions Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:02:43 +0200 Message-ID: <07CA5FD9-067D-4EAE-8BFD-64BB44C6FACE@gmail.com> References: <20524da70904041606t6e1dcb51ma568894b171e465b@mail.gmail.com> <1A2419E0-F631-4991-A62E-078F8602356A@gmail.com> <20524da70904052124k31abdd5aj4c5e68474edc669f@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lqhv2-0005eu-7f for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 02:02:52 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lqhux-0005d1-FD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 02:02:51 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50789 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lqhux-0005cu-Ab for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 02:02:47 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f160.google.com ([209.85.219.160]:56103) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Lqhuw-0001EW-LG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2009 02:02:46 -0400 Received: by ewy4 with SMTP id 4so2038892ewy.42 for ; Sun, 05 Apr 2009 23:02:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20524da70904052124k31abdd5aj4c5e68474edc669f@mail.gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Samuel Wales Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Apr 6, 2009, at 6:24 AM, Samuel Wales wrote: > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 04:48, Carsten Dominik > wrote: >> Your action function may now set the variable >> `org-map-continue-from-here' to the buffer position >> from where you wish to continue the search. In your case >> you would now remove you attempt to fix this > > Thank you very much. I will try it. > > I figured it was probably intended to relieve the user of > responsibility for point. However, using mapping for editing > operations seems like the right thing to do also. > > Your solution and the new paragraph in the manual should take care > of it. > > So I set it to where point is after a deletion? i.e. on the > following item? On the following item, yes. - Carsten