[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: post-command-hook to slow?

From: Thorsten Jolitz
Subject: Re: post-command-hook to slow?
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 19:37:51 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)

"Pascal J. Bourguignon" <address@hidden> writes:

> Thorsten Jolitz <address@hidden> writes:
>> Its a bit hard to explain, in fact I don't want to run a
>> post-command-hook, I just want to call an Org function in a temporary
>> buffer - but that function runs a post-command hook, and I have to deal
>> with that (it is somehow run too late, when the temp buffer is already
>> closed).
>> An MWE is difficult unless you are an Org user, but anyway:
>> Evaluate this in an emacs-lisp-mode buffer (without the
>> surrounding #+begin_ and #+end_ delimiters):
>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>> (setq org-todo-keywords
>>       (quote
>>        ((sequence "TODO(t)" "NEXT(n)" "|" "DONE(d!/!)")
>>      (sequence
>>       "WAITING(w@/!)" "HOLD(h@/!)" "|"
>>       "CANCELLED(c@/!)" "PHONE"))))
>> (with-temp-buffer
>>   (org-mode)
>>   (insert "* Level 1\nSome Text\n")
>>   (org-todo)
>>   (message "%s" (buffer-substring-no-properties
>>      (point-min) (point-max))))
>> #+end_src
>> you should be prompted for a state, choose TODO first (t) and it should
>>  work.
>> Then evaluate 'with-temp-buffer again, this time chosing a state with an
>>  @ in its definition:
>> because thats triggers taking a log note (and calling a
>> post-command-hook function).
>> You should get the error:
>> ,-----------------------------------------------
>> | Error in post-command-hook (org-add-log-note):
>> | (error "Marker does not point anywhere")
>> `-----------------------------------------------
>> When you insert a message statement at the very beginning of
>> `org-add-log-note' that print current-buffer an major-mode, you will see
>> that its called in the emacs-lisp buffer and not in the temp buffer. 
> Ok.   So you see how things go.  This is a general technique in emacs
> applications, since we start from an editing event loop. 

Thank you very much for your detailled and very informative reply!

> org-todo opens a menu buffer with a list of choices.    In this case, it
> reads the user choice modaly, with org-icompleting-read: you cannot do
> anything else than select a menu item.
> But then, in some cases, it needs to let the user edit a note.
> To do that,
> org-todo adds org-add-log-note to post-command-hook, and
> org-add-log-note removes itself from it.  This chains the org-todo and
> org-add-log-note commands in the main editing event loop.
> org-add-log-note sets up a *Org Note* buffer, and similarly, returns, to
> let the user edit it in the main editing event loop.  When the user
> types C-c C-c, the org-ctrl-c-ctrl-c command is called which store the
> note.  In the mean time a lot of commands can be given by the user.  He
> may switch to other buffers and come back to the note a long time later.
> Since the org application doesn't expect to do anything else once the
> note is stored, org-store-log-note doesn't have any final hook.  We
> would have to advice it, to add one.  On the other hand,
> org-store-log-note is called from the org-finish-function hook, set up
> by org-add-log-note, so we could set this hook to call
> org-store-log-note, and our own function.

I had to write it down like this to get a clear picture:

| * Program Flow
|   1. user calls (outshine-use-outorg 'org-todo)
|      - calls outorg-edit-as-org, which sets up a *outorg-edit-buffer*
|        in org-mode and makes it current buffer
|      - calls org-todo
|        + adds org-add-log-note to post-command-hook
|        + org-add-log-note is called SOMETIMES
|          * removes itself from post-command-hook
|          * sets up a *Org Note* buffer
|          * sets up org-finish-function hook
|          * returns control to main editing event loop
|       - calls outorg-copy-edits-and-exit => TOO EARLY       
|   [2. user eventually types C-c C-c to store note]
|      [- org-finish-function hook calls org-store-log-note]

> In any case, we have two architectures, either:
> - we may use the same modeless model as the org application (and any
>   other emacs application), therefore not using with-temp-buffer, but
>   creating a temporary buffer, and by way of hooks, chain the activities
>   we need.  or:

This is the way to go for me, since this is the way outorg works. I
figured out how to do it more or less like this:

#+begin_src emacs-lisp
(defun outshine-use-outorg-finish-store-log-note ()
  "Finish store-log-note and exit recursive edit"

[these are just relevant excerpts, not a complete working function]
#+begin_src emacs-lisp
      (call-interactively fun))
      (when (marker-buffer org-log-note-marker)

This works fine in cases when org-add-log-note is actually called, but
for state changes to e.g. TODO when no log is taken, the finish
function and thus outorg-copy-edits-and-exit is never called, thus the
*outorg-edit-buffer* stays around.

To solve the problem completely I would need need something like

#+begin_src emacs-lisp
      (if (not (marker-buffer org-log-note-marker))

but this does not work ...

> - we can still use with-temp-buffer, but we have to call
>   (recursive-edit) to insert an editing event loop to let the user gain
>   control until we (OR the user!) choose to exit or abort the recursive
>   edit.
> Here is how you would implement this later case:
> (defun pjb-finish-store-log-note-and-exit-recursive-edit ()
>   (org-store-log-note)
>   (exit-recursive-edit))
> (with-temp-buffer
>   (org-mode)
>   (insert "* Level 1\nSome Text\n")
>   (org-todo)
>   (message "BEFORE: %s" (buffer-substring-no-properties
>                          (point-min) (point-max)))
>   (when (marker-buffer org-log-note-marker)
>     (org-add-log-note)
>     (org-set-local 'org-finish-function 
> 'pjb-finish-store-log-note-and-exit-recursive-edit)
>     (recursive-edit))
>   (message "AFTER: %s" (buffer-substring-no-properties
>                         (point-min) (point-max))))

This works like a charm, and might even be better, but I want to reuse
existing code. 

> Notice that in this problem post-command-hook is only incidental, even
> if the error message reporte mentionned it.  It's used to chain the
> commands, but the problem is not related to commands and
> post-command-hook at all.

Thanks again, not only for helping solve the problem, but for giving
valuable insight into Emacs patterns.


reply via email to

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