On 2025-12-20 15:33, arthur miller wrote: >>> If we document that (EXP), not EXP should be a valid expression, we are >>> good. >> >> ... actually we do. So, maybe docstring can still be improved further. > > No to be a devils advoce, but I am not sure you do. If we look at:
I think Ihor is referring to the doc string, it isn’t quite consistent with the manual: org-capture-templates: > %(sexp) Evaluate elisp (sexp) and replace it with the results. manual: > ‘%(EXP)’ Evaluate Elisp expression EXP and replace it with the result. Best, -- Jacob S. Gordon [email protected] Please avoid sending me HTML emails and MS Office documents. https://useplaintext.email/#etiquette
