From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rainer Stengele Subject: Re: clocktable: maximum level 0 does not only avoid listing items but also does not calculate items Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:53:10 +0200 Message-ID: <4CC6DD46.3050507@diplan.de> References: <4C47F049.6060101@diplan.de> <231F0792-669F-49D2-976A-392EFA2C9EB9@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55319 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PAjxh-0001f0-Jo for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:53:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PAjxg-0006Oz-E5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:53:13 -0400 Received: from ns.diplan.de ([212.34.188.4]:36648 helo=mail.diplan.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PAjxg-0006Oi-1N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:53:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <231F0792-669F-49D2-976A-392EFA2C9EB9@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Carsten Dominik Cc: Bernt Hansen , org-mode List Am 26.10.2010 13:30, schrieb Carsten Dominik: > Hi Rainer, hi Bernt, > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 9:16 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: > >> Am 21.07.2010 16:24, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >>> >>> On Jul 13, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all! >>>> >>>> lately I use the marvelous clocktables a lot... >>>> >>>> For toplevel clocktables which just sum up "all" I use ":maxlevel 0" >>>> >>>> The manual reads >>>> >>>> :maxlevel Maximum level depth to which times are listed in the table. >>>> >>>> which I misunderstood. >>>> I understood: an unlisted item does not mean that its time is not added! >>>> But it looks like ":maxlevel 0" does not add everything up. >>> >>> >>> I cannot reproduce this, :maxlevel 0 works for me. >>> >>>> >>>> Ok, maybe the manual is a bit misleading here. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> How can I get a clocktable without any details which simply adds up everything in the scope? >>>> >>>> BTW, the ":stepskip0" parameter does not seem to be included in the manual. >>> >>> It is in the manual. >>> >>> - Carsten >>>> >>>> >>>> Rainer >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> Carsten, >> >> maybe I misunderstood. >> >> >> 1. Without maxlevbel I get I get >> >> #+BEGIN: clocktable :scope ("file1.org" "file2") :timestamp t :tstart "<2010-05-01 Sa 00:00>" :tend "<2010-07-31 Sa 23:55>" >> Clock summary at [2010-07-22 Do 09:07] >> >> | File | L | Timestamp | Headline | Time | | | >> |-------------------+---+---------------------+----------------+----------+--------+--------| >> | | | Timestamp | *Total time* | *327:51* | | | >> ... >> >> >> >> with :maxlevel 0 I get >> >> >> #+BEGIN: clocktable :maxlevel 0 :scope ("file1.org" "file2") :timestamp t :tstart "<2010-05-01 Sa 00:00>" :tend "<2010-07-31 Sa 23:55>" >> Clock summary at [2010-07-22 Do 09:11] >> >> | File | L | Timestamp | Headline | Time | >> |------+---+-----------+--------------+----------| >> | | | Timestamp | *Total time* | *232:17* | >> |------+---+-----------+--------------+----------| >> #+END: >> >> >> I would like to get the same results! >> Is ":maxlevel 0" intended to not include the sublevel clocks? > > I think I have finally fixed this bug. Please verify. > > Bernt, I made a change to clock tables which I think I understand. But can you please watch out for inconsistencies with the newest version? Maybe run some tests with old and new version, to make sure clock tables deliver the same results? > > Thanks! > > - Carsten Hi Carsten, I checked and found: - clocktable sums are resulting in identical values, independant of the ":maxlevel" level - without ":maxlevel" parameter some tables now give slightly different results than in the past, some give identical results * I hope the new results are correct, but I did not have time to check in detail Looks good, I will test further. Thanks and thanks! -- Rainer