Re: Pending contents in org documents (Re: Asynchronous blocks for everything (was Re: ...))

[Ihor Radchenko]

Bruno Barbier <brubar.cs@gmail.com> writes:

>> I now think that overlays are the right way; the /pending content/ is
>> attached to one buffer: a base or a clone; this is for the user to
>> decide.
>>
>> I will manually add text properties, below the overlay, to mark the text
>> as /pending/, so that pending contents will be visible and read-only in
>> all other buffers, base or indirect ones.

Thanks!
I have some minor concerns about implementation, but you clearly
demonstrated the things can be working in general.

Let me now zoom out all the way down to org-pending library design.

While reading the library header and `org-pending' docstring (btw, it
should probably be a separate library, not a part of org-macs), I felt
confused about terminology and also had déjà vu's about what org-pending
does.

More or less, org-pending implements Elisp asynchronous process control,
but the processes are associated with region, not the whole buffer.
Hence, I feel that we should adopt terminology similar to the existing
terminology for processes - process filters, process sentinels, sending
signals to processes, etc. And similar API.

Also, I am not sure if I like the idea of exposing raw PINFO alist and
mutating it. In particular, I have doubts about mutating CONTENT.
What we might do instead is implement PINFO as struct with custom
accessors/setters.

WDYT?

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>