Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[SW]

Pressing S-left/right anywhere on a timestamp decreases/increases it by one day.

Pressing S-down/up on a component of a timestamp decreases/increases it by one
unit of that component.

How can we include an easy and quick way to decrease/increase the timestamp by
one week. I find myself having to do that quite often (increase). It's not
difficult to hit S-right/up seven times, but there is the possibility of
miscounting.

Should I just bind ``C-u 7 S-right`` and ``C-u 7 S-left``? 

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Christian Moe]

C-c . +1w

Yours,
Christian

On 5/15/12 3:34 PM, SW wrote:
> Pressing S-left/right anywhere on a timestamp decreases/increases it by one day.
>
> Pressing S-down/up on a component of a timestamp decreases/increases it by one
> unit of that component.
>
> How can we include an easy and quick way to decrease/increase the timestamp by
> one week. I find myself having to do that quite often (increase). It's not
> difficult to hit S-right/up seven times, but there is the possibility of
> miscounting.
>
> Should I just bind ``C-u 7 S-right`` and ``C-u 7 S-left``?
>
>
>

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[SW]

Christian Moe <mail <at> christianmoe.com> writes:

> C-c . +1w

This updates the timestamp to be one week from *today*. I want to push the
timestamp one week forward from wherever it is.

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Nick Dokos]

SW <sabrewolfy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pressing S-left/right anywhere on a timestamp decreases/increases it by one day.
> 
> Pressing S-down/up on a component of a timestamp decreases/increases it by one
> unit of that component.
> 
> How can we include an easy and quick way to decrease/increase the timestamp by
> one week. I find myself having to do that quite often (increase). It's not
> difficult to hit S-right/up seven times, but there is the possibility of
> miscounting.
> 

I generally lean on S-up and watch the changing date until it gets to
where I want it - no counting.

> Should I just bind ``C-u 7 S-right`` and ``C-u 7 S-left``? 
> 
> 

I wouldn't bother but I'm not you: if you really want to, you can define a trivial function

   (defun sw-one-week-bump ()
       (org-timestamp-up-day 7))

and bind it.

If you need help with the latter, see the emacs manual:

   (info "(emacs) Customizing Key Bindings")

and for the gory details, the emacs lisp manual:

   (info "(elisp) Keymaps")

Nick

PS. Not sure how much emacs you know - if any/all of this is obvious, please disregard.

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Christian Moe]

Oops, sorry! Forgot the double-plus.

With point on the timestamp,

C-c . ++1w

Yours,
Christian

On 5/15/12 3:42 PM, SW wrote:
> Christian Moe<mail<at>  christianmoe.com>  writes:
>
>> C-c . +1w
>
> This updates the timestamp to be one week from *today*. I want to push the
> timestamp one week forward from wherever it is.
>
>
>

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[SW]

Christian Moe <mail <at> christianmoe.com> writes:

> Oops, sorry! Forgot the double-plus.
> 
> With point on the timestamp,
> 
> C-c . ++1w

Ah, that works. Thanks :)

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[SW]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos <at> hp.com> writes:

> > Should I just bind ``C-u 7 S-right`` and ``C-u 7 S-left``? 
 
> I wouldn't bother but I'm not you: if you really want to, you can
> define a trivial function
> 
>    (defun sw-one-week-bump ()
>        (org-timestamp-up-day 7))
> 
> and bind it.

<snip>
>    (info "(emacs) Customizing Key Bindings")

<snip>

> PS. Not sure how much emacs you know - if any/all of this is obvious,
> please disregard.

:) Thanks. I'm an "advanced beginner" with Emacs, so the example was helpful.

Aside: Hitting ``M-: (info "(emacs) Customizing Key Bindings")`` gives me an
error about the info file not existing. I installed Emacs 23.2.1 in CrunchBang
Linux (Debian Stable) and (IIRC) org-mode 7.8.06 via a Debian package. Any ideas?

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Nick Dokos]

SW <sabrewolfy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos <at> hp.com> writes:
> 
> > > Should I just bind ``C-u 7 S-right`` and ``C-u 7 S-left``? 
>  
> > I wouldn't bother but I'm not you: if you really want to, you can
> > define a trivial function
> > 
> >    (defun sw-one-week-bump ()
> >        (org-timestamp-up-day 7))
> > 
> > and bind it.
> 
> <snip>
> >    (info "(emacs) Customizing Key Bindings")
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > PS. Not sure how much emacs you know - if any/all of this is obvious,
> > please disregard.
> 
> :) Thanks. I'm an "advanced beginner" with Emacs, so the example was helpful.
> 
> Aside: Hitting ``M-: (info "(emacs) Customizing Key Bindings")`` gives me an
> error about the info file not existing. I installed Emacs 23.2.1 in CrunchBang
> Linux (Debian Stable) and (IIRC) org-mode 7.8.06 via a Debian package. Any ideas?
> 

I don't know if there is a separate doc package on your distro (or any
distro for that matter): I generally install emacs from source and both
the emacs and elisp info files are built and installed along with it.

Nick

PS. C-x C-e will evaluate a form in any bufferm, with no need for ``M-: foo RET''

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Brian van den Broek]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 530 bytes --]

On 15 May 2012 17:25, "SW" <sabrewolfy@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> Aside: Hitting ``M-: (info "(emacs) Customizing Key Bindings")`` gives me
an
> error about the info file not existing. I installed Emacs 23.2.1 in
CrunchBang
> Linux (Debian Stable) and (IIRC) org-mode 7.8.06 via a Debian package.
Any ideas?
>

A data point:

I've the same broken info system on the ssame version of CrunchBang. I
really like cb, but there are wrinkles like that. The TODO for solving that
hasn't percolated up my list yet :-)

Best,

Brian vdB

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 685 bytes --]

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[SW]

Brian van den Broek <brian.van.den.broek <at> gmail.com> writes:

> A data point:
> I've the same broken info system on the ssame version of CrunchBang.
> I really like cb, but there are wrinkles like that. The TODO for
> solving that hasn't percolated up my list yet

In the meantime, I've posed it on the CrunchBang forums:
http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/topic/19641/emacs-info-pages/

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Nick Dokos]

SW <sabrewolfy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Brian van den Broek <brian.van.den.broek <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > A data point:
> > I've the same broken info system on the ssame version of CrunchBang.
> > I really like cb, but there are wrinkles like that. The TODO for
> > solving that hasn't percolated up my list yet
> 
> In the meantime, I've posed it on the CrunchBang forums:
> http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/topic/19641/emacs-info-pages/
> 

On Ubuntu 11.04, they are in the package emacs23-common. When I
installed emacs23, emacs23-common came along for the ride.

But I saw a message implying that Debian does not consider emacs
documentation free (!?!?), so the info files may be in
emacs23-common-non-dfsg in this case.

Nick

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Memnon Anon]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:

> But I saw a message implying that Debian does not consider emacs
> documentation free (!?!?), so the info files may be in
> emacs23-common-non-dfsg in this case.

The FSF isn't the only one caring about "Freedom".
Where more than one entity exists, they are bound to disagree sometimes :).


,----[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFSG#GFDL ]
| Much documentation written by the GNU Project, the Linux Documentation
| Project and others licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License
| contain invariant sections, which do not comply with the DFSG. This
| assertion is the end result of a long discussion and the General
| Resolution 2006-001.[11]
| 
| Due to the GFDL invariant sections, content under this license must be
| separately contained in an additional "non-free" repository which is not
| officially considered part of Debian.
`----

hth
Memnon

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[SW]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos <at> hp.com> writes:

<snip>
 
> But I saw a message implying that Debian does not consider emacs
> documentation free (!?!?), so the info files may be in
> emacs23-common-non-dfsg in this case.

Thanks, that's the package :)

FWIW, I think you meant:

(info "(emacs) Key Binding Commands")

earlier, or else I don't have the node you mentioned.

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Nick Dokos]

Memnon Anon <gegendosenfleisch@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:
> 
> > But I saw a message implying that Debian does not consider emacs
> > documentation free (!?!?), so the info files may be in
> > emacs23-common-non-dfsg in this case.
> 
> The FSF isn't the only one caring about "Freedom".
> Where more than one entity exists, they are bound to disagree sometimes :).
> 
> 
> ,----[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFSG#GFDL ]
> | Much documentation written by the GNU Project, the Linux Documentation
> | Project and others licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License
> | contain invariant sections, which do not comply with the DFSG. This
> | assertion is the end result of a long discussion and the General
> | Resolution 2006-001.[11]
> | 
> | Due to the GFDL invariant sections, content under this license must be
> | separately contained in an additional "non-free" repository which is not
> | officially considered part of Debian.
> `----
> 

Yup - as I indicated, I found it somewhat surprising, so I found and
read the resolution.  I think it's all pretty small nits, but thank
goodness IANAL (haven't even played one on TV): the havoc that I could
wreak would be unimaginable...

Nick

Re: Timestamp: Forward or backward by a week

[Nick Dokos]

SW <sabrewolfy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos <at> hp.com> writes:
> 
> <snip>
>  
> > But I saw a message implying that Debian does not consider emacs
> > documentation free (!?!?), so the info files may be in
> > emacs23-common-non-dfsg in this case.
> 
> Thanks, that's the package :)
> 
> FWIW, I think you meant:
> 
> (info "(emacs) Key Binding Commands")
> 
> earlier, or else I don't have the node you mentioned.
> 

That may very well be: I was looking in the emacs24 info files which are
probably different.