Re: [PATCH] Fixing refile cache use for org-goto in indirect buffers.

[Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com>]

On 20/09/2022 19:44, Yuchen Pei wrote:
> Thanks for the reply.
> On Mon 2022-09-19 22:48:34 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote:
> 
>> On 19/09/2022 12:16, Yuchen Pei wrote:
>>> To reprod:
>>> - make sure the org-refile-targets generates a big enough list where
>>>     the refile cache makes a difference
>>> - visit an org file in org-refile-targets
>>> - M-x clone-indirect-buffer-other-window
>>> - C-0 C-c C-w to clear cache
>>> - M-: (org-refile-get-targets)
>>
>> Have you tried to execute this command in the indirect buffer?
> 
> Yes, and it would be instant (assuming (org-refile-get-targets) has been
> run in the original buffer).

My hypothesis is that if refile targets are requested from an indirect 
buffer at first then next attempt from the base buffer causes 
recalculation because of previous result is not properly stored. The 
code at the end of the function requires a similar fix.

>>> diff --git a/lisp/org-refile.el b/lisp/org-refile.el
>>> index 16cff25bd..7189ef595 100644
>>> --- a/lisp/org-refile.el
>>> +++ b/lisp/org-refile.el
>>> @@ -306,7 +306,10 @@ converted to a headline before refiling."
>>>    	(dolist (f files)
>>>    	  (with-current-buffer (if (bufferp f) f (org-get-agenda-file-buffer f))
>>>    	    (or
>>> -	     (setq tgs (org-refile-cache-get (buffer-file-name) descre))
>>> +	     (setq tgs (org-refile-cache-get
>>> +                        (buffer-file-name (when (bufferp f)
>>> +                                            (buffer-base-buffer f)))
>>> +                        descre))
>>
>> Thank you for the attempt to improve handling of indirect buffers.
>>
>> I am afraid, more serious refactoring is required to reuse result of
>> `buffer-base-buffer', for the previous attempt to avoid issues with
>> `buffer-file-name' see
>> satotake to emacs-orgmode… [PATCH] org-refile.el: Fix the case of
>> *scratch* buffer. Sat, 15 May 2021 19:38:39
>> +0900. https://list.orgmode.org/20210515103839.8574-2-doublequotation@gmail.com
>>
>> There are several corner cases with `org-refile-cache', `org-goto',
>> and buffers.
>> - Perhaps buffer name, not file name should be used as the cache key
>>    if some buffer is not associated with any file. Alternatively cache
>>    should not be used at all.
> 
> It seems there may be problem with this idea.  If buffer name is the
> key, that will mean a buffer and its indirect clone will generate two
> caches, which duplicates the work, no?

Certainly if a buffer has its base buffer then file name associated with 
the base buffer should be tried at first. However besides indirect 
buffers, buffers not associated with any files at all may exist. I am 
not sure that using buffer name is a good idea for them since temporary 
buffers may be discarded and new ones with same names may be created. My 
point is that refile targets for temporary buffers should not be cached 
at all or buffer name should be used as the key. Behavior should be 
deterministic. I do not request such change from you, but maybe it is 
just an additional couple of lines at the location you are changing anyway.

>> So the change is an improvement (I would prefer `and' instead of
>> `when' in such expression, but it does not really matter). Leaving
>> aside other issues and more serious refactoring, it seems, storing
>> results to the cache requires a similar fix, so perhaps it is possible
>> to move "(setq f ...)" code above of "(or ...)" and reuse f as the
>> cache key.
> 
> Sure, I will update my patch when I get around to it again.

Great!

>> Please, send patches produced by "git format-patch" command.
> 
> I guess you had some problem applying the patch?

No, I missed commit message in the expected format
https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contribute.html#commit-messages
Just send the patch as an attachment.