Re: Heading/item insert commands

[Ingo Lohmar <i.lohmar@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1333 bytes --]

Hi Nicolas,

I am not sure I understand: As I tried to make clear, I am *not* interested
in changing the UI for anybody but myself. I probably should have omitted
the "long-run" comment altogether.

What I am interested in is refactoring: add a layer of functions that
cleanly do what is now done in an ad-hoc way, eg, inside
of-insert-todo-heading, or which is not done at all.

Or are you talking about the parameters of such new functions?


On Oct 4, 2017 12:33 PM, "Nicolas Goaziou" <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:

Hello,

Ingo Lohmar <i.lohmar@gmail.com> writes:

> What I have in mind for starters:
>
> Add orthogonal internal functions that can handle *all* sensible
> combinations of requirements.  Then rewrite existing commands in terms
> of these, but possibly adding new ones.
>
> I would not want to break any workflows, of course.  But in the *long*
> run, we could rethink if the existing commands and their prefix-arg
> behavior are really what users want, or if we provide other ones by
> default.
>
> Does that sound reasonable, or are there any grave obstacles I did not
> consider, or any hard reasons why such changes could not be accepted?

I think, as a starter, we should discuss and agree on how the UI should
be. IMO, implementation follows, not the other way around.

WDYT?

Regards,

--
Nicolas Goaziou

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2059 bytes --]