From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Bug: org-insert-heading-respect-content inserts at the wrong level if target heading is invisible [7.9.2 (release_7.9.2-883-g6fb36e.dirty @ /home/dlm/share/org-mode.git/lisp/)] Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:34:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87vc9xkehc.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <874ni598fq.wl%jamshark70@dewdrop-world.net> <87k3qebvw4.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46539) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5DC2-00058y-9S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:34:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5DC0-0008FC-Nr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:34:30 -0500 Received: from we-in-x022a.1e100.net ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22a]:41810 helo=mail-we0-x22a.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U5DC0-0008F1-HH for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 05:34:28 -0500 Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id z53so5758616wey.29 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 02:34:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (James Harkins's message of "Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:50:47 +0800") 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.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: jamshark70@dewdrop-world.net Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi James, James Harkins writes: > One concern: When you tested with C-u C-RET, was the point on a > hidden headline? Yes. > The problem only occurs if the current heading is > folded up underneath a parent heading. AFAIK cursor movement in > org-mode ensures that the point is never on invisible text, which is > why I wrote a short lisp function to demonstrate. It seems to me the > issue reproduces only when calling org-insert-heading > non-interactively, then, so I wanted to check if your test reproduces > the problem without the patch. Looking forward reading your feedback on this! -- Bastien