From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: org-insert-heading rewritten from scratch Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:04:35 +0200 Message-ID: <2AD3F53E-C4C6-44D9-8D1E-6B47575780C9@gmail.com> References: <6570EFE0-1DCA-44D1-AAD9-BE51A278EE58@gmail.com> <87txj0d3y8.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <2CBE3492-5A45-48D6-AF3B-A81D0C322009@gmail.com> <877gf2nd2y.fsf@gmail.com> <87a9jxlzsa.fsf@gmail.com> <7F861E6F-B668-4D9E-A684-37610C5BF93D@gmail.com> <878uze3v0x.fsf@gmail.com> <145CF774-77B2-4FCE-B52D-998D9EEC468F@gmail.com> <87zjru2fg7.fsf@gmail.com> <87r4d62eig.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49706) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGrDs-0005RZ-77 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:04:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGrDi-0001gy-Qx for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:04:48 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-x236.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::236]:53247) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGrDi-0001gp-Jk for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 10:04:38 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id e12so3927082wgh.33 for ; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 07:04:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87r4d62eig.fsf@gmail.com> 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: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: Eric Abrahamsen , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Sep 3, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > Carsten Dominik writes: >=20 >> I am still not clear about this. In your earlier mail you made this = example: >>=20 >>> Well same as above: I think it eats blank lines where it shouldn't. = It >>> the following cases: >>>=20 >>> * H1 >>>=20 >>> ** H2 >>>=20 >>> H >>> X >>>=20 >>> and >>>=20 >>> * H1 >>>=20 >>> * H2 >>>=20 >>> H >>>=20 >>> X =20 >>>=20 >>> I don't think there's any reason for M-RET to eat blank line before >>> point with either `org-blank-before-new-entry' set to `auto' or t. = It >>> should know that a blank line is expected before the new entry and >>> therefore should create the headline at point. >>=20 >> WIth `auto', there will be an empty line before the next entry in = both >> cases. In both cases it looks at the H2 headline and sees the empty >> line before it. Are you saying the behaviour should be different in >> both cases? >=20 > Yes, it should. >=20 > As you point out, in both cases the algorithm knows that there should = be > a blank line before the new entry (with the assumption that behaviour = is > set to `auto'). In the first case, if it inserts the headline at = point, > there will be none, so it has to add one. In the second case, there is > no need to add one since creating it at point will fulfill the > requirement (which is "a blank line before new headline"). Yes. But you agree that the *result* should be the same, i.e. that = there will be an empty line before the newly inserted headline. I think/hope we do agree now. >=20 > Re-reading myself, I agree that my quoted explanations are a bit > confusing. I hope this should clarify my point. I think so. Thank you for your patience. - Carsten=