emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net>
To: Jens Schmidt <jschmidt4gnu@vodafonemail.de>
Cc: Samuel Loury <konubinix@gmail.com>, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Quoting property names in tag/property matches [Was: [BUG?] Matching tags: & operator no more implicit between tags and special property]
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2023 07:10:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bkelhwyz.fsf@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2937cbf6-4ee7-0bdc-b585-d74c9d80883b@vodafonemail.de>

Jens Schmidt <jschmidt4gnu@vodafonemail.de> writes:

> TL;DR:
>
> - I think we cannot make "&" mandatory because of backward compatibility.

Sorry for the confusion. I did not mean that "&" should be mandatory,
just that "&" might make it easier to avoid a need to escape things. So,
it could be used _instead_ of escaping.

> - Even if we made "&" mandatory, it would not really solve the quoting
>   problem, since the parser is rather hacky and other quoting and
>   context issues would still be there.

But at this point you are more familiar with that parser than I am, so
my idea does not seem to be viable.

> This all calls for a proper parser, based on peg or bovine or whatever.
> Hopefully that parser would still keep backward compatibility, but
> that's probably wishful thinking.

Backward compatibility will be easy - just leave the current code when
old query version is detected. We should better focus on the new syntax
in future and leave the current syntax as compatibility layer that will
be eventually deprecated.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-09-02  7:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-23  7:57 [BUG?] Matching tags: & operator no more implicit between tags and special property Samuel Loury
2023-08-23 10:21 ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-23 10:37   ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-23 10:31 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-23 10:38   ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-23 14:00     ` [RFC] Quoting property names in tag/property matches [Was: [BUG?] Matching tags: & operator no more implicit between tags and special property] Jens Schmidt
2023-08-23 15:55       ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-24  7:30         ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-24  7:32       ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-24  8:52         ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-25 18:46           ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-26 10:16             ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-26 11:53               ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-26 12:00                 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-26 12:19                   ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-26 12:22                     ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-26 12:54                       ` Jens Schmidt
2023-08-27  7:11                         ` Samuel Loury
2023-08-27  7:43                           ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-09-01 16:48                             ` Jens Schmidt
2023-09-01 23:59                               ` Tom Gillespie
2023-09-02  0:02                                 ` Tom Gillespie
2023-09-02  7:10                               ` Ihor Radchenko [this message]
2023-09-02 13:14                                 ` Redoing the current tag/property parser in a real grammar [was: Re: [RFC] Quoting property names in tag/property matches] Jens Schmidt
2023-09-03  7:04                                   ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-09-02 13:18                                 ` [RFC] Quoting property names in tag/property matches Jens Schmidt
2023-08-30 16:28                         ` [RFC] Quoting property names in tag/property matches [Was: [BUG?] Matching tags: & operator no more implicit between tags and special property] Jens Schmidt
2023-08-31  8:08                           ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-08-31 10:24                             ` Jens Schmidt
2023-09-03  6:53                         ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-09-03  9:25                           ` Jens Schmidt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.orgmode.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87bkelhwyz.fsf@localhost \
    --to=yantar92@posteo.net \
    --cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
    --cc=jschmidt4gnu@vodafonemail.de \
    --cc=konubinix@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).