From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Faulty logic in org-cmp-tag/alpha
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 11:15:50 +0100
Message-ID: <874l8bjaqx.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
References: <CAELgYhcWzkvzmoEjGk-MmtLrSRGbPoR9HqTf-dpo3KZ9DkXsUg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34847)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1h2vUo-0005w4-CZ
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 06:15:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1h2vUn-0005oC-Qa
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 06:15:54 -0400
Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.193]:53211)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>)
	id 1h2vUn-0005mv-JN
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 06:15:53 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAELgYhcWzkvzmoEjGk-MmtLrSRGbPoR9HqTf-dpo3KZ9DkXsUg@mail.gmail.com>
	(Carlos Pita's message of "Sat, 9 Mar 2019 17:55:41 -0300")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Carlos Pita <carlosjosepita@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Hello,

Carlos Pita <carlosjosepita@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> there is a problem in this kind of logic:
>
>     (cond ((not ta) +1)
>       ((not tb) -1)
>       ((string-lessp ta tb) -1)
>       ((string-lessp tb ta) +1))))
>
> in that when both ta and tb are nil then they are arbitrarily sorted.
> Since the agenda sorting strategy is lexicographic this logic
> virtually invalidates any strategy that puts tag or alpha first, v.g.
> '(tag-up priority-down).
>
> I've attached a patch returning nil when both ta and tb are nil so as
> to fallback to the next sorting criterion without favoring lhs nor
> rhs.

Applied. Thank you.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou