[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [O] [PATCH] Refactor org-set-tags arguments for clarity

From: Kaushal Modi
Subject: Re: [O] [PATCH] Refactor org-set-tags arguments for clarity
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 12:21:32 +0000

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 7:58 AM Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> wrote:

Calls in code base do not matter, since we can change them. The above
Sexp would be equivalent to

  (org-set-tags 'current)

Correct. I was just extrapolating based on that, that people could be making similar uses in their configs and packages. 

A search like this ( https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=%22org-set-tags+nil%22+language%3A%22Emacs+Lisp%22&type=Code ) shows that (org-set-tags nil t) is pretty viral in one org-settings.el out there.
> instances in the Org source itself. I though just created a wrapper in my
> personal config to do ALIGN-ONLY-CURRENT when prefix is C-u C-u.

I don't think an user needs to distinguish between aligning all and
aligning only current. I think this is just confusing.

That's alright. I can see that it might not be that useful as org-set-tags anyways aligns the tags. (I am just used to abusing the free C-u C-u in my config :))
> PS: Also, in addition, was thinking of calling JUST-ALIGN ALIGN-ALL
> instead.

Sounds good.

> With:
>     (defun org-set-tags (&optional ALIGN-ALL ALIGN-ONLY-CURRENT) ..
> it will be more apparent that they are mutually exclusive args.

It still bugs me because (org-set-tags t t) doesn't make any sense.

Same sentiments here (I even fixed one case of (org-set-tags t t) in that patch).

The only concern is the one I presented above; doing this will break many personal configs.

Kaushal Modi

reply via email to

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