Re: Possible to get a subtree agenda view?

[Robert Goldman <rpgoldman@sift.info>]

Matthew Lundin wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> 
> Robert Goldman <rpgoldman@sift.info> writes:
> 
>> Matthew Lundin wrote:
> [snip]
>>> For a custom agenda command:
>>>
>>> (setq org-agenda-custom-commands
>>>       '(("f" tags-tree "+car+TODO=\"TODO\""
>>> 	 ((org-show-entry-below t)
>>> 	  (org-show-hierarchy-above nil)))
>>>           ;; other commands
>>>         ))
>>>
> [snip]
>> In particular, the variable settings weren't near the agenda discussion,
>> and are not in the index.  Question:  would it be useful to add a
>> variable index to the info file?  If it is, and there isn't someone more
>> texinfo competent than me to do it, I'll look into seeing how hard it
>> would be to do this.
>>
>> Also, in the manual and code there's no real discussion of how the
>> settings part of the org-agenda-custom-commands is to be used.  I mean,
>> it's clear that they are variable bindings, but there's no use case.
>>
>> Would it be reasonable to modify your example above into an example to
>> be added to the texinfo file?  I would be happy to have a whack if this
>> seems like a good idea.
> 
> I'm guessing the best place for such a tutorial would be Worg (the
> org-mode wiki). http://orgmode.org/worg/

I think it would be appropriate to have a tutorial like this in Worg,
but not a replacement.  If you look at the custom agenda commands
discussion in the manual, you will see that there is a discussion of how
most of the fields of custom command s-expression are to be used, but no
mention of the settings.  I was just arguing that modifying the example
in the manual (or, possibly adding material from your example to it)
would be useful.

As an aside, I found the doc string somewhat confusing, as well.  The
docstring says

"settings  A list of option settings, similar to that in a let form, so like
          this: ((opt1 val1) (opt2 val2) ...).   The values will be
          evaluated at the moment of execution, so quote them when
needed." [apologies --- Thunderbird will no doubt make a hash of this]

I don't believe that there is any special notion of "option settings"
that this should be --- isn't this just a command that can be used to
bind arbitrary variables?

I will try to write up a proposed documentation patch and post it to the
list.  Probably easier at this point to do that than to try to describe
what I /would/ do!

Best,
Robert