[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive comma
From: |
Alain . Cochard |
Subject: |
Re: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc) |
Date: |
Sat, 11 Feb 2023 18:12:02 +0100 |
Ihor Radchenko writes on Fri 10 Feb 2023 09:56:
> Only a handful of interactive commands support invisible edit
> checks. In particular: self-insert-command (typing), deleting char
> forward/backward, and `org-meta-return'.
>
> I guess we may instead provide a defcustom and hook the check into
> `pre-command-hook'. Would it be of interest?
Thank you for the feedback. Let me add that the issue I raised was
not at all a theoretical/abstract one for me. I constantly use 'undo'
to see where in the buffer I was working (then, I insert a space, do
'undo undo', and can resume what I was doing). So obviously it would
be of a huge interest for me if org-catch-invisible-edits worked in
that case...
At any rate, shouldn't "2.2.3 Catching invisible edits" be a little
bit more specific about what kind of invisible edits are concerned?
Or perhaps just a warning that it is not all of them.
> > PS: a very minor incidental point: after 'bar' has disappeared, the
> > headline is then void, so I tend to say that the ellipsis should
> > immediately disappear as well.
>
> The headline still contains newlines.
Right. Thanks.
--
EOST (École et Observatoire des Sciences de la Terre)
ITE (Institut Terre & Environnement) | alain.cochard@unistra.fr
5 rue René Descartes [bureau 110] | Phone: +33 (0)3 68 85 50 44
F-67084 Strasbourg Cedex, France | [ slot available for rent ]
- Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc, Alain . Cochard, 2023/02/09
- Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc), Ihor Radchenko, 2023/02/10
- Re: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc),
Alain . Cochard <=
- Re: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc), Ihor Radchenko, 2023/02/11
- Re: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc), Alain . Cochard, 2023/02/12
- [PATCH] Allow customizing commands affected by `org-fold-catch-invisible-edits' (was: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc)), Ihor Radchenko, 2023/02/12
- Re: [PATCH] Allow customizing commands affected by `org-fold-catch-invisible-edits' (was: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc)), Alain . Cochard, 2023/02/14
- Re: [PATCH] Allow customizing commands affected by `org-fold-catch-invisible-edits' (was: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc)), Ihor Radchenko, 2023/02/16
- Re: [PATCH] Allow customizing commands affected by `org-fold-catch-invisible-edits' (was: Should we extend org-catch-invisible-edits to more interactive commands? (was: Catching invisible edits: problem understanding doc)), Alain . Cochard, 2023/02/17