Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Loris Bennett]

Hi,

Is there any way to break up an overly long #+TBLFM line?

Cheers,

Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under construction.

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Karl Voit]

* Loris Bennett <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Hi,

Hi!

> Is there any way to break up an overly long #+TBLFM line?

The question is: why?

My guess: you're missing the C-c ' (org-edit-special) which offers
you a user-friendly way to modify formulas.

-- 
mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML to Org-mode:
       > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs <

https://github.com/novoid/extract_pdf_annotations_to_orgmode + more on github

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Loris Bennett]

Hi Karl,

Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:

> * Loris Bennett <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi!
>
>> Is there any way to break up an overly long #+TBLFM line?
>
> The question is: why?

Because, purely aesthetically, I don't like having a #+TBLFM line which
is 240 characters long when the window (and the table in it) is less
than chars wide.

> My guess: you're missing the C-c ' (org-edit-special) which offers
> you a user-friendly way to modify formulas.

You're right, I did know about C-c ' but not with table formulae.  Nice!

However, I still don't like the long #+TBLFM, although it's not going to
kill me.

Cheers,

Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under construction.

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Loris Bennett]

"Loris Bennett" <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> writes:

> Hi Karl,
>
> Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:
>
>> * Loris Bennett <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>> Is there any way to break up an overly long #+TBLFM line?
>>
>> The question is: why?
>
> Because, purely aesthetically, I don't like having a #+TBLFM line which
> is 240 characters long when the window (and the table in it) is less
> than chars wide.

Oops, that should be: less than 90 chars wide

>> My guess: you're missing the C-c ' (org-edit-special) which offers
>> you a user-friendly way to modify formulas.
>
> You're right, I did know about C-c ' but not with table formulae.  Nice!
>
> However, I still don't like the long #+TBLFM, although it's not going to
> kill me.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under construction.

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Nick Dokos]

"Loris Bennett" <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> writes:

> Hi Karl,
>
> Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:
>
>> * Loris Bennett <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>> Is there any way to break up an overly long #+TBLFM line?
>>
>> The question is: why?
>
> Because, purely aesthetically, I don't like having a #+TBLFM line which
> is 240 characters long when the window (and the table in it) is less
> than chars wide.
>
>> My guess: you're missing the C-c ' (org-edit-special) which offers
>> you a user-friendly way to modify formulas.
>
> You're right, I did know about C-c ' but not with table formulae.  Nice!
>
> However, I still don't like the long #+TBLFM, although it's not going to
> kill me.
>

That's good, because I think you'll have to live with it :-)

There is support for multiple TBLFM lines, but not in the way you want:
they are alternatives, rather than cumulative - see

(info "(org) Editing and debugging formulas")

the section entitled "Using multiple #+TBLFM lines".

--
Nick

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Samuel Wales]

i find the table editor is broken in maint. the point in the other
window is off screen most of the time.  at least with large fonts.

On 1/25/16, Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Loris Bennett" <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> writes:
>
>> Hi Karl,
>>
>> Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:
>>
>>> * Loris Bennett <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>> Is there any way to break up an overly long #+TBLFM line?
>>>
>>> The question is: why?
>>
>> Because, purely aesthetically, I don't like having a #+TBLFM line which
>> is 240 characters long when the window (and the table in it) is less
>> than chars wide.
>>
>>> My guess: you're missing the C-c ' (org-edit-special) which offers
>>> you a user-friendly way to modify formulas.
>>
>> You're right, I did know about C-c ' but not with table formulae.  Nice!
>>
>> However, I still don't like the long #+TBLFM, although it's not going to
>> kill me.
>>
>
> That's good, because I think you'll have to live with it :-)
>
> There is support for multiple TBLFM lines, but not in the way you want:
> they are alternatives, rather than cumulative - see
>
> (info "(org) Editing and debugging formulas")
>
> the section entitled "Using multiple #+TBLFM lines".
>
> --
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  And
ANYBODY can get it.

Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Loris Bennett]

Hi Nick,

Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com> writes:

[snip: Loris' whinging and Karl's response (24 lines)]

>> However, I still don't like the long #+TBLFM, although it's not going to
>> kill me.
>>
>
> That's good, because I think you'll have to live with it :-)
>
> There is support for multiple TBLFM lines, but not in the way you want:
> they are alternatives, rather than cumulative - see
>
> (info "(org) Editing and debugging formulas")
>
> the section entitled "Using multiple #+TBLFM lines".

I was aware of this and have found it useful.

However, it seems a little inconsistent that some options, like
'#+OPTIONS' or '#+LATEX_HEADER', are cumulative whereas others, like
'#+TBLFM', are not.  Is there a logic to this that I am overlooking?  If
not, is there an overview of how the different options behave?

Cheers,

Loris

-- 
This signature is currently under construction.

Re: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

"Loris Bennett" <loris.bennett@fu-berlin.de> writes:

> However, it seems a little inconsistent that some options, like
> '#+OPTIONS' or '#+LATEX_HEADER', are cumulative whereas others, like
> '#+TBLFM', are not.

Those are different things. 

#+LATEX_HEADER is a global keyword, which affects the whole document.
Most are related to export. There is no rule for them as each back-end
can treat them in any way. You may check `org-export-options-alist' for
the standard behaviour of the generic ones. Those that are not export
related (e.g., #+STARTUP, or #+CATEGORY), are expected to appear only
once. If they appear more, usually, only the first occurrence is
considered, but this is really an implementation detail.

Now, there are also affiliated keyword, which are local to the element
they apply to. Ther are "#+CAPTION", "#+HEADER", "#+NAME", "#+PLOT",
"#+RESULTS" and any "#+ATTR_..." construct. Among them, only
"#+CAPTION", "#+HEADER" and "#+ATTR_..." can be repeated. This is
defined in Org's syntax.

Eventually, there is "#+TBLFM", which doesn't belong to any of the
previous categories. This is just part of the syntax of Org tables. As
such, it follows its own rule, which is that multiple lines are allowed,
but only the first one is "active" in the current table.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou

table editor is off screen (was: Breaking up long #+TBLFM line?)

[Karl Voit]

* Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
> i find the table editor is broken in maint. the point in the other
> window is off screen most of the time.  at least with large fonts.

In my setup, this is always the case, yes. Very annoying.

To be more specific:

When I press "C-c '" on a table, the table editor gets opened as a
second buffer below the table. When the cursor is on a field
reference like "@3$2", the corresponding field(s) are marked in the
upper buffer. Unfortunately, in many cases, the upper buffer (with
the table) is scrolled so that the highlighted text is above the
first visible line.

This is very annoying to me because I do have a tilted monitor so
that it's in portrait format (not the usual landscape): I've got
plenty of screen space for large tables *and* formula editor and all
I get is the formula editor with an out-of-sight table.

You can imagine that this is something I have to avoid to show in
any Org-mode demo.

-- 
mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML to Org-mode:
       > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs <

https://github.com/novoid/extract_pdf_annotations_to_orgmode + more on github

Re: table editor is off screen

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at> writes:

> * Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> wrote:
>> i find the table editor is broken in maint. the point in the other
>> window is off screen most of the time.  at least with large fonts.
>
> In my setup, this is always the case, yes. Very annoying.
>
> To be more specific:
>
> When I press "C-c '" on a table, the table editor gets opened as a
> second buffer below the table. When the cursor is on a field
> reference like "@3$2", the corresponding field(s) are marked in the
> upper buffer. Unfortunately, in many cases, the upper buffer (with
> the table) is scrolled so that the highlighted text is above the
> first visible line.
>
> This is very annoying to me because I do have a tilted monitor so
> that it's in portrait format (not the usual landscape): I've got
> plenty of screen space for large tables *and* formula editor and all
> I get is the formula editor with an out-of-sight table.

Fixed. Thanks to both of you.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou

Re: table editor is off screen

[Samuel Wales]

thanks!

-- 
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com

The disease DOES progress.  MANY people have died from it.  And
ANYBODY can get it.

Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.