From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marco Wahl Subject: Re: Preventing org-cycle from scrolling the buffer Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:29:39 +0200 Message-ID: <845zekiluk.fsf@gmail.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34095) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jJIpk-0003gy-Tt for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 11:29:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jJIpj-0003In-V5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 11:29:44 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:35301) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jJIpj-0003Hw-OY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 11:29:43 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id i19so3241348wmb.0 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 08:29:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Dmitrii Korobeinikov's message of "Thu, 19 Mar 2020 13:49:51 +0600") 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-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Dmitrii Korobeinikov Cc: emacs-orgmode Dmitrii Korobeinikov writes: > When calling org-cycle on a collapsed section which contains a lot of > text, the headline is adjusted to the top of the page. Collapsing it > doesn't revert the scroll, which makes it hard to quickly peek at > what's in the section without getting disoriented. Is there a flag or > some other way of turning off this autoscroll? AFAICS this behavior can be controlled via customizable variable org-cycle-hook { M-x customize-variable RET org-cycle-hook RET } by removing entry org-optimize-window-after-visibility-change. > Scroll revert wouldn't be so bad to have either, by the way (in > addition to, not instead of, though). Since org knows when the cursor > moves away from the headline after tabbing, it seems this feature can > be implemented without too much hassle. I would even go as far as to > suggest making it a default if it gets done. > > What do you think? IDK. AFAICS you are right with your argumentation. I don't see the need of that feature, though, yet. But that's just me. I think you are the best candidate to try an implementation of the feature. Best regards, -- Marco