From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id GCYaObXfvV+UPQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 04:38:13 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id sPjvNLXfvV+yGwAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 04:38:13 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD9309404C8 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 04:38:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:60686 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khmZG-00086e-1m for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:38:10 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42120) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khmYN-00086Q-Cx for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:37:15 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:62479) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khmYK-0008Bz-1G for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:37:14 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E20659EE17; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:37:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=kyXk+RySa7dNA7hvPHQ3jKODTIo=; b=dT4T3f 9LKRr+fgO9gghMfRorphyM2S9QgUE4tal2j2dw0THRvuP5e4Jrdx7gB1YUU/1t1a AyaEqvA1U/SNDI4SZ8NLZBKSMYikE//seT7kcnpszc8iGIk/QGTFFEh8YFug8JXz fBLeBB63b9tkKrWJBQP6/K+n7+Q+w5/F7tHHg= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D94889EE16; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:37:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=kyleam.com; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=k6/XeWHWkURdVA66R8EV+dF0jDN+EZubQrCY5+Cp9HY=; b=fS5MYl95bGmNMYLexCaE2nrTEG+X1dlKtPvm+9vxC7uLXelZkuRJZ7I2G49QK1X0bq5+w+xZx5Y6YdaM6/cnrBVnTby3TUUoA6Okt9b3pg5jPfWXC+e73byXiRU8+9QdUxa1s/4hKNjib0dh0faPBk+1UmbfsEomx4TzVGJIfic= Received: from localhost (unknown [45.33.91.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6367F9EE15; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:37:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from kyle@kyleam.com) From: Kyle Meyer To: Daniele Nicolodi Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc/org-manual.org: Extend table formulas Lisp form documentation In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:37:08 -0500 Message-ID: <87im9u832j.fsf@kyleam.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E117BD88-2ED7-11EB-97C8-74DE23BA3BAF-24757444!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.147.108.71; envelope-from=kyle@kyleam.com; helo=pb-smtp2.pobox.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Org Mode List Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=pobox.com header.s=sasl header.b=dT4T3f 9; dkim=pass header.d=kyleam.com header.s=mesmtp header.b=fS5MYl95; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.21 X-TUID: RTPH44dADP0E Daniele Nicolodi writes: > Hello, > > I always found the description of Lisp forms in Org table formulas not > extremely clear, especially in regard to the use of mode flags. The > attached patch tries to clarify the manual a bit. Thanks. > Would it be worth to mention org-sbe in the same section of the manual? Yeah, it looks like there's no mention of org-sbe in the manual, so I think so (as a separate patch). > Subject: [PATCH] doc/org-manual.org: Extend table formulas Lisp form > documentation > > Be more explicit about how fields are interpolated into the Lisp > forms, clarify the use of mode flags, and add a cuple more examples. s/cuple/couple/ Typically a manual change will get a "* doc/org-manual.org (
):" entry in the commit message. > --- > doc/org-manual.org | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) [...] > +By default, references are interpolated as literal Lisp strings: the > +field content is replaced in the Lisp form stripped of leading and > +trailing white space and surrounded in double-quotes. For example: > > -Here are a few examples---note how the =N= mode is used when we do > -computations in Lisp: > +: '(concat $1 $2) > > -- ='(concat (substring $1 1 2) (substring $1 0 1) (substring $1 2))= :: > +concatenates the content of columns 1 and column 2. This and similar spots in this patch produce incorrect indentation in the info output: trailing white space and surrounded in double-quotes. For example: '(concat $1 $2) concatenates the content of columns 1 and column 2. Adding "#+texinfo: @noindent" above the line would prevent that. To check the result, you can generate the info output with `make info' and then visit it with `C-u C-h i doc/org'. Aside from that, the changes here look like an improvement to me. As far as "interpolated" goes, this patch adds one more instance to a section that carries 4 of the 5 occurrences in the code base, so I'd say it's fine to leave as is. I think the "replaced" or "substituted" suggestions by Tim Cross are good ones, though, if anyone cares to send a follow-up patch.