Re: next-error for agenda searches

[Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com>]

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> On 12/19/21, Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com> wrote:
>> multiple agenda views is not an uncommon workflow. You may have daily
>
> i think this is a strong objection.  multiple simultaneous agenda
> views seems to sink my suggestion.
>
> can one have multiple simultaneous c-c / buffers?  and multiple
> grep/occur/compilation shell minor mode?

I am not sure what you mean by multiple C-c / buffers. org-sparse-tree
does not create new buffers, just changes visibility of the current
buffer.

> or a grep buffer and an occur buffer and a compilation shell minor
> mode buffer simultaneously?  what disambiguates those?
>
> idk what is done in such cases.  perhaps there is an assumption of a
> single set of errors at a time, or some buffer local thing.

According to next-error docstring, only the last grep/occur/compilation
result is used. In theory, we can also do the same for agendas and AFAIU
it is even not that hard to implement.

If more people are interested, I do not see why next-error integration
cannot be included into Org.

>>> furthermore, the next-closest thing, follow mode, puts point in wrong
>>> window.  also, 'canonical visibility is not present so i cannot see
>>> everything [this might or might not be fixable by user].
>>
>> Can you elaborate?
>
> well it is moot because of the accessibility issue, but it is
> unsuitable for the next-error task.  point in wrong window so you have
> to switch.  some things hidden so you have to make visible is all i
> meant.  again, moot so no suggestions needed here.

FYI, there is org-fold-show-context-detail. You can customise how much
is revealed when jumping to an entry from agenda view.

>> Might be useful. Also, I personally prefer org-quickpeek in agenda.
>
> can't seem to find that package but next-error allows editing not just peeking.

I referred to http://github.com/alphapapa/org-quick-peek
It cannot help with editing though.

> but basically i have had org for a long time and i am not able to
> maintain my forest as well as i need to.

Hmm... I myself went through several refactors of my Org file
structures. Exactly because things become unmaintainable over time. It
is hard to design a good structure without enough experience with the
old one.

I usually take things slowly and keep old and new structures together.
New things are going to the new structure and old things are moved from
old to new bit by bit (there is simply a daily 5 min task for this).

Hope it helps.

> my suggestion was for org's sake and i didn't think this much detail
> would be needed at the time.  i used my computer use time to do the
> best i could, but it seems that more detail was needed, and that
> detail needed discussion.  my bad.

Now it is quite clear for me what you meant. The idea is reasonable.

> n.b.  i've been on the list for years, and many core features of org,
> and parts thereof, were actually... my suggestions :).

Now, when I looked, mailbox search revealed the truth :)
I only casually followed the list until the beginning of this year.

> but sometimes i miss the mark apparently, especially lately.  as in this case.
>
> still, not sure why multiple grep buffers or grep with occur or c-c /,
> etc. are compatible but multiple simultaneous agenda not so.

Simultaneous agendas can be compatible, as I mentioned above. Just need
to take the last generated agenda/occur/grep/etc. It will follow the
existing next-error logic.

Best,
Ihor