From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Wales Subject: Re: Unhiding edited areas Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:23:43 -0700 Message-ID: <20524da70907301323v6af0393t7a7475cb98e6ecef@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A71BF50.2050401@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> <20524da70907301110m208bc575jc1f18de4460cc56e@mail.gmail.com> <4A71EB7A.8060608@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MWcAL-0000cA-57 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:23:53 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MWcAF-0000ad-AX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:23:51 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40869 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MWcAF-0000Zj-5h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:23:47 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f219.google.com ([209.85.217.219]:34143) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MWcAD-00010w-Ju for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:23:46 -0400 Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19so3101985gxk.18 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:23:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A71EB7A.8060608@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> 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: Martin Pohlack Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Martin, On 2009-07-30, Martin Pohlack wrote: >> '(defadvice undo (after org-undo-reveal activate) >> "Make point and context visible after an undo command in Org-mode." >> (and (org-mode-p) (org-reveal))) >> ;;(ad-unadvise 'undo) > > Awesome, this is exactly what I was looking for! Maybe we can improve on it with one or more of these: 1) Check visibility before revealing. 2) Speed. 3) (emacs) /Include visibility in the undo stack/ so that visibility while undoing is always what it was when you did the editing. 4) (emacs) Implement undo-redo so that manually revealing does not break the chain as it does with undo. > The current undo system is very powerful as it doesn't lose history > (unless you hit a quota limit). With undo-redo systems you usually can > lose history if you edit things in an old state. Suddenly redo is not > available anymore. You can only access the most recent branch in the > history tree. Yes, unless you implement a tree. But even with that limitation, I prefer undo-redo. The cognitive burden is not the only limitation of undo-the-undo. With undo-the-undo, you cannot realistically copy text from different places in the undo history. Try to go back 50 edits, copy, go back a few more edits (you're in trouble already :)), copy, go forward 10, copy, go forward 15, copy, go back 15 more, copy, go back 15 more, copy. With undo-redo, I think that it would be faster. > http://e-texteditor.com/blog/2006/making-undo-usable Yes, I agree that there are some good ideas there. -- Myalgic encephalomyelitis makes you die decades early (Jason et al. 2006) and suffer severely. Conflicts of interest are destroying research. What people "know" is wrong. Silence = death. http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/What_Is_ME_What_Is_CFS.htm