From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sebastien Vauban Subject: Re: Tangling takes long - profiling and calling R Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 14:45:48 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87ioaobvl1.fsf@selenimh.access.network> <87a8vzc1u8.fsf@selenimh.access.network> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: 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-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Rainer M Krug writes: > >> I would not remove it as even I have some org files using them - shame >> on me. To be clear, are we talking of constructs such as: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- ** Subtree :PROPERTIES: :tangle: no :END: --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- ? > We can check for that in Org Lint and warn the user. > >> But what about making it user configurable? a variable >> ~org-babel-tangle-use-deprecated-header-args~ which if set to non-nil would >> enable this additional code, if nil it would be skipped? The default >> should be set to ~t~ to be backward compatible. > > This looks like backward-compatibility hell to me. If we make it > conditional the feature is no longer deprecated, is it? I understand your point, and I'm enclined to agree with you (for a long-term sanity and stability of the mode we all cherish) -- even if I dunno yet if I still use such (Well, if this is the above structure, then, yes, I use it a lot as well...). > The more general question is: how many years do we need to wait before > removing a deprecated (i.e., marked as such) feature? Your suggestion with Org-lint, or even writing a function that would convert from the old to the new syntax, makes a shorter period acceptable IMO. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban