Re: [O] sparse tree search still hides matching drawers (bug?)

On 5/6/16, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > You already reported that bug, which was fixed in master branch. > I didn't apply it to maint because it changes the default value of > a defcustom, hence introducing a slight user-visible change. thanks for being thorough and for

Re: [O] Bug: missing header argument does not work any longer [8.3.4 (8.3.4-47-gaf853d-elpaplus @ c:/Users/harald/AppData/Roaming/.emacs.d/elpa/org-plus-contrib-20160502/)]

Harald Sanftmann writes: > I have some org-tables which contain empty fields. I specified :missing "?" > to get the right results. > When I try to plot them with Gnuplot the empty fields are not exported as '?' > but just as empty strings > ''. Gnuplot therefore just uses the

[O] Bug: missing header argument does not work any longer [8.3.4 (8.3.4-47-gaf853d-elpaplus @ c:/Users/harald/AppData/Roaming/.emacs.d/elpa/org-plus-contrib-20160502/)]

Remember to cover the basics, that is, what you expected to happen and what in fact did happen.  You don't know how to make a good report?  See http://orgmode.org/manual/Feedback.html#Feedback Your bug report will be posted to the Org-mode mailing

Re: [O] Bug: check that org-element--cache-sync-keys is non-nil before clrhash [8.3.4 (8.3.4-42-gae73c7-elpa @ /home/mah/.emacs.d/elpa/org-20160425/)]

Hello, "Mark A. Hershberger" writes: > Emacs : GNU Emacs 24.4.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.14.5) > of 2015-03-07 on trouble, modified by Debian > Package: Org-mode version 8.3.4 (8.3.4-42-gae73c7-elpa @ > /home/mah/.emacs.d/elpa/org-20160425/) > > I'm using

[O] Evaluate all org tables in file before exporting?

Hi folks, I am looking if anyone already has a solution (a function) that evaluates all the tables in the file/buffer. I should be then simply able to add that to local value of before-save-hook in org-mode, right? Currently, I need to remember to C-u C-c C-c on all the tables before exporting

Re: [O] Question on nested-blocks syntax

Albert Krewinkel writes: > Nicolas Goaziou writes: >> I don't think so. It would introduce unnecessary complexity. > > I guess that makes sense. Too bad, though. My answer was terse. Let me elaborate a bit. There are a few issues that

Re: [O] Question on nested-blocks syntax

Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Albert Krewinkel writes: > >> Is there any chance that indentation-based nesting will become legit >> org-mode syntax? > > I don't think so. It would introduce unnecessary complexity. I guess that makes sense. Too bad,

Re: [O] sparse tree search still hides matching drawers (bug?)

Hello, Samuel Wales writes: > in maint, i wanted to show categories, so i did c-c / / for category. > > the properties drawers stayed closed. shouldn't they show matches? You already reported that bug, which was fixed in master branch. I didn't apply it to maint because

Re: [O] Question on nested-blocks syntax

Hello, Albert Krewinkel writes: > Is there any chance that indentation-based nesting will become legit > org-mode syntax? I don't think so. It would introduce unnecessary complexity. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou

[O] Question on nested-blocks syntax

Hi list, I was wondering about the current block syntax, specifically about nested blocks. The current way to get nested blocks requires escaping of the nested block commands, e.g. #+BEGIN_EXAMPLE ,#+BEGIN_EXAMPLE Meta-example ,#+END_EXAMPLE #+END_EXAMPLE My personal feeling is that it