From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug in org-habits
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 20:01:42 -0500
Message-ID: <m2lhae7f2h.fsf@newartisans.com>
References: <871tc83p01.fsf@flynn.nichework.com> <84io5j1k5h.fsf@gmail.com>
	<CALnw1fTau74U258Ewdj6CyFuMWEAyauqsds+izFtiSJJxoc+jQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<m2a8qv1b3o.fsf@newartisans.com> <84611j19hk.fsf@gmail.com>
	<5638C2A1.2090801@iancu.ch> <87h9l32gfc.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<m2io5ievpz.fsf@newartisans.com> <87d1vq3mh4.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<m2pozqdei2.fsf@newartisans.com> <874mh23iw0.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<m28u6eby6f.fsf@newartisans.com> <87ziyu1wfe.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57176)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jwiegley@gmail.com>) id 1ZtmSZ-0001c4-5k
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 20:01:55 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jwiegley@gmail.com>) id 1ZtmSU-0008Sz-69
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 20:01:55 -0500
Received: from mail-yk0-x235.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c07::235]:33990)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jwiegley@gmail.com>) id 1ZtmSU-0008St-1k
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 20:01:50 -0500
Received: by ykdr3 with SMTP id r3so46833794ykd.1
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 17:01:49 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <87ziyu1wfe.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of
	"Wed, 04 Nov 2015 00:43:17 +0100")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

>>>>> Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:

> As a matter of fact, going to the end of an entry is not negligible, because
> of inlinetasks. Also, it is not really O(1) since it depends on the size of
> the entry. To get an idea, on my computer, moving past a 500 lines entry
> takes around 0.001s. I can imagine slower computers, or larger entries,
> neither being unheard of, having a slightly noticeable delay.

I'm having a hard time buying the performance argument, since I've been using
Org-mode for many years, and never has this been a problem. You're making me
pay a cost (enforced structure), for a value only one of us perceives.

> Also, supporting both locations means that users will pay the full price in
> entries without a property drawer, even if they chose the fast path, i.e.,
> drawer at the beginning of the entry, in the first place. This kind of
> defeats some of the advantages of the current state.

It wouldn't be "users": it would be people intentionally opting to allow
floating properties. _I_ would be paying the price, and I will pay it happily
to keep 8.2 behavior.

John