>>>>> Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes:
> Eli Zaretskii <e...@gnu.org> writes:
>>> Can we instead store them in memory? Yes, but (1) it will make
>>> Emacs RAM consumption grow constantly and more and more previews
>>> are generated; (2) it will require significant changes in the
>>> Org mode codebase.
>>
>> I understand all that, but if the user wants it, and insist on
>> not caching any data, let them have what they want.
> It is not about letting or not letting them. I would have to
> implement it. (I am ok with it, but I am not going to prioritize
> my time for nice-to-haves; though I would not mind patches
> submitted by interested users).
>> ... My surprise was caused by your "it is impossible"; I now
>> understand that you meant "not reasonable" or perhaps "users will
>> not like that" instead.
> I meant:
> 1. not reasonable in a sense that it has downsides compared to
> what we do now - save latex previews on disk 2. impossible in a
> sense that we do not have an existing toggle to store cached
> previews in memory. Such functionality would have to be added; and
> it is not necessarily trivial to add it.
I too was one of those complainers who wanted to be able to disable
org-persist completely. The argument about latex preview is really a
non-starter in my opinion. I never use latex-preview and I'm sure I'm
not alone in this. I also would not class the disabling of org-persist
to be a 'nice-to-have'.
Best wishes,
Colin Baxter.
