[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [O] [BUG] in Release 8.2 - editing code in indirect buffer

From: Carsten Dominik
Subject: Re: [O] [BUG] in Release 8.2 - editing code in indirect buffer
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:35:22 +0200

On 24.9.2013, at 18:17, Sebastien Vauban <address@hidden> wrote:

> Hello Carsten,
> Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> On 23.9.2013, at 09:40, Rainer M Krug <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> When starting to edit a code block via C-c ' everything works as expected
>>> and the code block is highlighted and an indirect buffer is opened.
>>> When I click into the highlighted block, I an "send" to the indirect buffer.
>>> This behavior changes, after saving with C-s, even when nothing has been
>>> edited: the area in the original org file looses its magic, and looks normal
>>> again and can also be edited!
>>> The indirect buffer stays functional and, upon close via C-c ' saves the
>>> changes into the original buffer and *overwrites* changes done in this block
>>> in the org document.
>> This is a bug which is difficult to fix in all generality. What should really
>> happen is that the text in the original buffer is made read-only. But so far
>> this does not happen in our implementation (due to Dan Davison IIRC). The
>> reason for this is that read-only text properties left by accident in a
>> buffer are difficult to get rid of.
>> There are many things the user could go back and screw up the original.
>> That's why Org choses to protect with highlighting with an overlay. Note that
>> this is not a protection against editing, but it is a visual warning.
> I never knew that "your" goal was to make the code block read-only in the Org
> buffer. Note that I would be really opposed to such a change. Editing code in
> the prose would really become a pain to me -- please know that I NEVER use the
> indirect buffer.

Hi Sebastian,

I only mean while there is a special buffer also editing this block!

- Carsten

> I hope that we will block such a functionality, would the read-only feature
> become possible.
>> However, what happens during saving is indeed a problem - the overlay gets
>> lost (not really, it gets squeezed to zero by first removing the source code
>> and then inserting the modified version).
>> Could you please try this patch and test it to see if it is stable and does
>> the right thing?
> Best regards,
>  Seb
> -- 
> Sebastien Vauban

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

reply via email to

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