emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] [PATCH] Do not indent option keywords


From: Carsten Dominik
Subject: Re: [O] [PATCH] Do not indent option keywords
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 19:57:10 +0200

On 10.5.2013, at 08:39, Achim Gratz <address@hidden> wrote:

> Carsten Dominik writes:
>> by decoration you mean font-lock support?
> 
> Yes, but I also don't think these should ever become indented in the
> first place.  That's debatable of course, the syntax as defined by
> org-element does not require this IIRC.

Well, which are the ones you think should never become indented?  OPTIONS, 
TITLE, of maybe you mean the whole suite of keywords?

I sometimes put the setup below a major headline "* setup" or so, to make them 
hide away and give the buffer a clean look.  Depending on indentation setting 
it then does make some sense to allow indentation.  So I think the font-lock 
fix is more important than the indentation one.

Please read on below.


> 
>> Maybe this would be a better fix:
>> 
>>      Modified lisp/org.el
>> diff --git a/lisp/org.el b/lisp/org.el
>> index 745fb82..43df094 100644
>> --- a/lisp/org.el
>> +++ b/lisp/org.el
>> @@ -5867,7 +5867,8 @@ by a #."
>>         ((or (equal dc1 "+results")
>>              (member dc1 '("+begin:" "+end:" "+caption:" "+label:"
>>                            "+orgtbl:" "+tblfm:" "+tblname:" "+results:"
>> -                          "+call:" "+header:" "+headers:" "+name:"))
>> +                          "+call:" "+header:" "+headers:" "+name:"
>> +                          "+options:"))
>>              (and (match-end 4) (equal dc3 "+attr")))
>>          (add-text-properties
>>           beg (match-end 0)
> 
> Sure, that helps too and has certainly less potential for controversy.
> 
> I think we should make an effort to shift most if not all the regex
> stuff in org.el into org-element.  There's far too much duplication with
> subtle differences sprinkled all over the place to get match data to
> work with and it's almost hopeless to try and find all such uses for a
> single element.

What do you mean?  Do you meant to use the org-elemnt parser
and base also font-lock on it?  Or do you mean all the definitions
of regexp constants.  This sounds desirable - but it also sounds
like an extremely daunting task with possibilities for problems
in side effects of regexp matching that will be difficult to find
and might only show after a long time.  I guess we could start
such a process one regexp at a time.

- Carsten




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]