* bug#9695: allowed date range
[not found] <87ty7kd8oh.fsf@kanis.fr>
@ 2011-10-12 6:53 ` Ivan Kanis
2011-10-13 7:28 ` Tassilo Horn
[not found] ` <87ehyiitv7.fsf@googlemail.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Ivan Kanis @ 2011-10-12 6:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9695
After investigating further <2011-10-17 >--<2011-10-30 > works but not
<2011-10-17>--<2011-10-30>. The regexp for a timestamp is defined in
org-ts-regexp :
"<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}[^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
Shouldn't the trailing space be optional?
--
Ivan Kanis
http://kanis.fr
When you're looking at life
In a strange new room
Maybe drowning soon
Is this the start of it all?
-- Ian Curtis
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-12 6:53 ` bug#9695: allowed date range Ivan Kanis
@ 2011-10-13 7:28 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-13 7:48 ` Eric S Fraga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Tassilo Horn @ 2011-10-13 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-orgmode
Ivan Kanis <ivan.kanis@googlemail.com> writes:
Hi!
> After investigating further <2011-10-17 >--<2011-10-30 > works but not
> <2011-10-17>--<2011-10-30>. The regexp for a timestamp is defined in
> org-ts-regexp :
>
> "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}[^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
>
> Shouldn't the trailing space be optional?
In your regex, there is no trailing whitespace, but are right that it is
in the original definition.
,----[ C-h v org-ts-regexp RET ]
| org-ts-regexp is a variable defined in `org.el'.
| Its value is
| "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} [^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
| ^
`----
Strangely, that timestamp regex didn't change for 3 years...
Oh, now I see what's wrong. All time stamps consist of the date and
then the day's name abbreviation, which is missing with your example.
Correct would be
<2011-10-17 Mon>--<2011-10-30 Sun>
Bye,
Tassilo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 7:28 ` Tassilo Horn
@ 2011-10-13 7:48 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-13 7:57 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Eric S Fraga @ 2011-10-13 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tassilo Horn; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org> writes:
> Ivan Kanis <ivan.kanis@googlemail.com> writes:
>
> Hi!
>
>> After investigating further <2011-10-17 >--<2011-10-30 > works but not
>> <2011-10-17>--<2011-10-30>. The regexp for a timestamp is defined in
>> org-ts-regexp :
>>
>> "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}[^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
>>
>> Shouldn't the trailing space be optional?
>
> In your regex, there is no trailing whitespace, but are right that it is
> in the original definition.
>
> ,----[ C-h v org-ts-regexp RET ]
> | org-ts-regexp is a variable defined in `org.el'.
> | Its value is
> | "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} [^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
> | ^
> `----
>
> Strangely, that timestamp regex didn't change for 3 years...
>
> Oh, now I see what's wrong. All time stamps consist of the date and
> then the day's name abbreviation, which is missing with your example.
> Correct would be
>
> <2011-10-17 Mon>--<2011-10-30 Sun>
>
> Bye,
> Tassilo
Although the day is optional according to the regexp. I would
definitely like to have the regexp with the space optional as well as
there are cases where I want to type the date in directly (not in org
mode for whatever reason). In those cases, it is easy to type
2011-01-01 or whatever but it's not necessarily trivial to determine the
day of the week...
Actually, interesting thought experiment: does org actually do any
consistency checks, comparing the date and the day of the week?
--
: Eric S Fraga (GnuPG: 0xC89193D8FFFCF67D) in Emacs 24.0.90.1
: using Org-mode version 7.7 (release_7.7.380.g54d7df)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 7:48 ` Eric S Fraga
@ 2011-10-13 7:57 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-13 8:02 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Tassilo Horn @ 2011-10-13 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-orgmode
Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
Hi Eric,
>> Oh, now I see what's wrong. All time stamps consist of the date and
>> then the day's name abbreviation, which is missing with your example.
>> Correct would be
>>
>> <2011-10-17 Mon>--<2011-10-30 Sun>
>
> Although the day is optional according to the regexp. I would
> definitely like to have the regexp with the space optional as well as
> there are cases where I want to type the date in directly (not in org
> mode for whatever reason). In those cases, it is easy to type
> 2011-01-01 or whatever but it's not necessarily trivial to determine
> the day of the week...
Yes, I agree, although you can use org-time-stamp everywhere (in emacs).
And you can actually insert timestamps simply by writing
<2011-10-13 >
with the whitespace to make it a valid timestamp. That will be shown as
day entry in the agenda, and you might have typed it in using some
non-emacs text editor on you phone.
Now, back in org-mode, simply S-<up> and S-<down> on any number, and et
voila, the missing day name abbrev is added automatically.
> Actually, interesting thought experiment: does org actually do any
> consistency checks, comparing the date and the day of the week?
No, I don't think so. Manipulating and creating timestamps using the
provided commands ensures their correctness, but for actual calculation
the day names are ignored. It's just for humans.
Bye,
Tassilo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 7:57 ` Tassilo Horn
@ 2011-10-13 8:02 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 10:15 ` Eric S Fraga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Dominik @ 2011-10-13 8:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tassilo Horn; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
On 13.10.2011, at 09:57, Tassilo Horn wrote:
> Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
>>> Oh, now I see what's wrong. All time stamps consist of the date and
>>> then the day's name abbreviation, which is missing with your example.
>>> Correct would be
>>>
>>> <2011-10-17 Mon>--<2011-10-30 Sun>
>>
>> Although the day is optional according to the regexp. I would
>> definitely like to have the regexp with the space optional as well as
>> there are cases where I want to type the date in directly (not in org
>> mode for whatever reason). In those cases, it is easy to type
>> 2011-01-01 or whatever but it's not necessarily trivial to determine
>> the day of the week...
>
> Yes, I agree, although you can use org-time-stamp everywhere (in emacs).
> And you can actually insert timestamps simply by writing
>
> <2011-10-13 >
>
> with the whitespace to make it a valid timestamp. That will be shown as
> day entry in the agenda, and you might have typed it in using some
> non-emacs text editor on you phone.
>
> Now, back in org-mode, simply S-<up> and S-<down> on any number, and et
> voila, the missing day name abbrev is added automatically.
>
>> Actually, interesting thought experiment: does org actually do any
>> consistency checks, comparing the date and the day of the week?
>
> No, I don't think so. Manipulating and creating timestamps using the
> provided commands ensures their correctness, but for actual calculation
> the day names are ignored. It's just for humans.
Just to confirm, this is correct.
- Carsten
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 7:48 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-13 7:57 ` Tassilo Horn
@ 2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 10:14 ` Eric S Fraga
` (2 more replies)
1 sibling, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Dominik @ 2011-10-13 8:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric S Fraga; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1763 bytes --]
On 13.10.2011, at 09:48, Eric S Fraga wrote:
> Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org> writes:
>
>> Ivan Kanis <ivan.kanis@googlemail.com> writes:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>>> After investigating further <2011-10-17 >--<2011-10-30 > works but not
>>> <2011-10-17>--<2011-10-30>. The regexp for a timestamp is defined in
>>> org-ts-regexp :
>>>
>>> "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}[^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
>>>
>>> Shouldn't the trailing space be optional?
>>
>> In your regex, there is no trailing whitespace, but are right that it is
>> in the original definition.
>>
>> ,----[ C-h v org-ts-regexp RET ]
>> | org-ts-regexp is a variable defined in `org.el'.
>> | Its value is
>> | "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} [^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
>> | ^
>> `----
>>
>> Strangely, that timestamp regex didn't change for 3 years...
>>
>> Oh, now I see what's wrong. All time stamps consist of the date and
>> then the day's name abbreviation, which is missing with your example.
>> Correct would be
>>
>> <2011-10-17 Mon>--<2011-10-30 Sun>
>>
>> Bye,
>> Tassilo
>
> Although the day is optional according to the regexp. I would
> definitely like to have the regexp with the space optional as well as
> there are cases where I want to type the date in directly (not in org
> mode for whatever reason).
I am attaching a patch which will make time stamps without a day name
like <2011-10-12> work correctly. Furthermore, pressing C-c C-c on
a time stamp will fill in or fix the day name.
However, I am not sure if this patch is complete, or if it
has side effects. So it would be good if a few people could
apply it and test it during their daily work for a few weeks,
and then report problems in this thread.
- Carsten
[-- Attachment #2: time-stamp-no-space.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 3415 bytes --]
diff --git a/lisp/org-clock.el b/lisp/org-clock.el
index e026d93..5dbe4dc 100644
--- a/lisp/org-clock.el
+++ b/lisp/org-clock.el
@@ -1117,7 +1117,7 @@ the clocking selection, associated with the letter `d'."
(looking-at
(concat "^[ \t]* " org-clock-string
" \\[\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}"
- " +\\sw+\.? +[012][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]\\)\\][ \t]*$")))
+ " *\\sw+\.? +[012][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]\\)\\][ \t]*$")))
(message "Matched %s" (match-string 1))
(setq ts (concat "[" (match-string 1) "]"))
(goto-char (match-end 1))
@@ -1249,7 +1249,7 @@ line and position cursor in that line."
(re-search-forward
(concat "^[ \t]* " org-clock-string
" \\[\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}"
- " +\\sw+ +[012][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]\\)\\][ \t]*$")
+ " *\\sw+ +[012][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]\\)\\][ \t]*$")
end t))
(beginning-of-line 1)
(throw 'exit t))
diff --git a/lisp/org.el b/lisp/org.el
index b26e1a3..83cf4c3 100644
--- a/lisp/org.el
+++ b/lisp/org.el
@@ -4645,7 +4645,7 @@ means to push this value onto the list in the variable.")
"\\|" org-deadline-string
"\\|" org-closed-string
"\\|" org-clock-string "\\)\\)?"
- " *\\([[<][0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} [^]\r\n>]*?[]>]\\|<%%([^\r\n>]*>\\)")
+ " *\\([[<][0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} ?[^]\r\n>]*?[]>]\\|<%%([^\r\n>]*>\\)")
org-planning-or-clock-line-re
(concat "\\(?:^[ \t]*\\(" org-scheduled-string
"\\|" org-deadline-string
@@ -5094,15 +5094,15 @@ This should be called after the variable `org-link-types' has changed."
(org-make-link-regexps)
-(defconst org-ts-regexp "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} [^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
+(defconst org-ts-regexp "<\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} ?[^\r\n>]*?\\)>"
"Regular expression for fast time stamp matching.")
-(defconst org-ts-regexp-both "[[<]\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} [^]\r\n>]*?\\)[]>]"
+(defconst org-ts-regexp-both "[[<]\\([0-9]\\{4\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\}-[0-9]\\{2\\} ?[^]\r\n>]*?\\)[]>]"
"Regular expression for fast time stamp matching.")
(defconst org-ts-regexp0 "\\(\\([0-9]\\{4\\}\\)-\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\)-\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\) *\\([^]+0-9>\r\n -]*\\)\\( \\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\):\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\)\\)?\\)"
"Regular expression matching time strings for analysis.
This one does not require the space after the date, so it can be used
on a string that terminates immediately after the date.")
-(defconst org-ts-regexp1 "\\(\\([0-9]\\{4\\}\\)-\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\)-\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\) +\\([^]+0-9>\r\n -]*\\)\\( \\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\):\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\)\\)?\\)"
+(defconst org-ts-regexp1 "\\(\\([0-9]\\{4\\}\\)-\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\)-\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\) *\\([^]+0-9>\r\n -]*\\)\\( \\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\):\\([0-9]\\{2\\}\\)\\)?\\)"
"Regular expression matching time strings for analysis.")
(defconst org-ts-regexp2 (concat "<" org-ts-regexp1 "[^>\n]\\{0,16\\}>")
"Regular expression matching time stamps, with groups.")
@@ -17931,6 +17931,8 @@ This command does many different things, depending on context:
(fboundp org-finish-function))
(funcall org-finish-function))
((run-hook-with-args-until-success 'org-ctrl-c-ctrl-c-hook))
+ ((org-in-regexp org-ts-regexp-both)
+ (org-timestamp-change 0 'day))
((or (looking-at org-property-start-re)
(org-at-property-p))
(call-interactively 'org-property-action))
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 409 bytes --]
> In those cases, it is easy to type
> 2011-01-01 or whatever but it's not necessarily trivial to determine the
> day of the week...
>
> Actually, interesting thought experiment: does org actually do any
> consistency checks, comparing the date and the day of the week?
>
> --
> : Eric S Fraga (GnuPG: 0xC89193D8FFFCF67D) in Emacs 24.0.90.1
> : using Org-mode version 7.7 (release_7.7.380.g54d7df)
>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
@ 2011-10-13 10:14 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-13 13:04 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-16 13:45 ` Michael Brand
2011-11-03 17:22 ` Michael Brand
2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Eric S Fraga @ 2011-10-13 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
> On 13.10.2011, at 09:48, Eric S Fraga wrote:
>> Although the day is optional according to the regexp. I would
>> definitely like to have the regexp with the space optional as well as
>> there are cases where I want to type the date in directly (not in org
>> mode for whatever reason).
>
> I am attaching a patch which will make time stamps without a day name
> like <2011-10-12> work correctly. Furthermore, pressing C-c C-c on
> a time stamp will fill in or fix the day name.
>
> However, I am not sure if this patch is complete, or if it
> has side effects. So it would be good if a few people could
> apply it and test it during their daily work for a few weeks,
> and then report problems in this thread.
Excellent. Thanks. I've applied the patch and will let you know if
anything strange happens! Silence should be taken as indicating no
problems encountered :-)
--
: Eric S Fraga (GnuPG: 0xC89193D8FFFCF67D) in Emacs 24.0.90.1
: using Org-mode version 7.7 (release_7.7.380.g54d7df.dirty)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 8:02 ` Carsten Dominik
@ 2011-10-13 10:15 ` Eric S Fraga
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Eric S Fraga @ 2011-10-13 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
> On 13.10.2011, at 09:57, Tassilo Horn wrote:
>
>> Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>>>> Oh, now I see what's wrong. All time stamps consist of the date and
>>>> then the day's name abbreviation, which is missing with your example.
>>>> Correct would be
>>>>
>>>> <2011-10-17 Mon>--<2011-10-30 Sun>
>>>
>>> Although the day is optional according to the regexp. I would
>>> definitely like to have the regexp with the space optional as well as
>>> there are cases where I want to type the date in directly (not in org
>>> mode for whatever reason). In those cases, it is easy to type
>>> 2011-01-01 or whatever but it's not necessarily trivial to determine
>>> the day of the week...
>>
>> Yes, I agree, although you can use org-time-stamp everywhere (in emacs).
>> And you can actually insert timestamps simply by writing
>>
>> <2011-10-13 >
>>
>> with the whitespace to make it a valid timestamp. That will be shown as
>> day entry in the agenda, and you might have typed it in using some
>> non-emacs text editor on you phone.
>
>
>>
>> Now, back in org-mode, simply S-<up> and S-<down> on any number, and et
>> voila, the missing day name abbrev is added automatically.
>>
>>> Actually, interesting thought experiment: does org actually do any
>>> consistency checks, comparing the date and the day of the week?
>>
>> No, I don't think so. Manipulating and creating timestamps using the
>> provided commands ensures their correctness, but for actual calculation
>> the day names are ignored. It's just for humans.
>
> Just to confirm, this is correct.
>
> - Carsten
>
so, in that case, it does make sense to allow date stamps without the
day!
(and I see that Carsten has already provided a patch for this :-)
--
: Eric S Fraga (GnuPG: 0xC89193D8FFFCF67D) in Emacs 24.0.90.1
: using Org-mode version 7.7 (release_7.7.380.g54d7df.dirty)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 10:14 ` Eric S Fraga
@ 2011-10-13 13:04 ` Tassilo Horn
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Tassilo Horn @ 2011-10-13 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
>> I am attaching a patch which will make time stamps without a day name
>> like <2011-10-12> work correctly. Furthermore, pressing C-c C-c on a
>> time stamp will fill in or fix the day name.
>>
>> However, I am not sure if this patch is complete, or if it has side
>> effects. So it would be good if a few people could apply it and test
>> it during their daily work for a few weeks, and then report problems
>> in this thread.
>
> Excellent. Thanks. I've applied the patch and will let you know if
> anything strange happens! Silence should be taken as indicating no
> problems encountered :-)
Ditto.
Bye,
Tassilo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 10:14 ` Eric S Fraga
@ 2011-10-16 13:45 ` Michael Brand
2011-11-09 18:18 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-11-03 17:22 ` Michael Brand
2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michael Brand @ 2011-10-16 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
Hi Carsten
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:27, Carsten Dominik
<carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
> Furthermore, pressing C-c C-c on
> a time stamp will fill in or fix the day name.
Thank you, this is something I always wanted to have for convenience
instead of using S-<up> + S-<down>.
> However, I am not sure if this patch is complete, or if it
> has side effects. So it would be good if a few people could
> apply it and test it during their daily work for a few weeks,
> and then report problems in this thread.
I started to use this patch too.
Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 10:14 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-16 13:45 ` Michael Brand
@ 2011-11-03 17:22 ` Michael Brand
2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michael Brand @ 2011-11-03 17:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
Hi Carsten
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:27, Carsten Dominik
<carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am attaching a patch which will make time stamps without a day name
> like <2011-10-12> work correctly. Furthermore, pressing C-c C-c on
> a time stamp will fill in or fix the day name.
>
> However, I am not sure if this patch is complete, or if it
> has side effects. So it would be good if a few people could
> apply it and test it during their daily work for a few weeks,
> and then report problems in this thread.
I wonder how C-c C-c with a prefix (supported are one to three C-u) on
a time stamp in a table field is expected to behave. In my opinion it
should not only adjust the day name but like before also evaluate the
table formula which it does not now. If the user does not expect and
check the missing logs of the table calculation update he might
wrongly assume that it happened and assume that there has been just no
change.
Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-10-16 13:45 ` Michael Brand
@ 2011-11-09 18:18 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-11-09 21:32 ` Michael Brand
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Carsten Dominik @ 2011-11-09 18:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Brand; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
I have now merged this patch, a big thanks to the testers
Michael, Eric, and Tassilo.
- Carsten
On 16.10.2011, at 15:45, Michael Brand wrote:
> Hi Carsten
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:27, Carsten Dominik
> <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Furthermore, pressing C-c C-c on
>> a time stamp will fill in or fix the day name.
>
> Thank you, this is something I always wanted to have for convenience
> instead of using S-<up> + S-<down>.
>
>> However, I am not sure if this patch is complete, or if it
>> has side effects. So it would be good if a few people could
>> apply it and test it during their daily work for a few weeks,
>> and then report problems in this thread.
>
> I started to use this patch too.
>
> Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: bug#9695: allowed date range
2011-11-09 18:18 ` Carsten Dominik
@ 2011-11-09 21:32 ` Michael Brand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Michael Brand @ 2011-11-09 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carsten Dominik; +Cc: Tassilo Horn, emacs-orgmode
Hi Carsten
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 19:18, Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have now merged this patch,
Thank you. I have still concerns about this, did I somehow miss the answer?:
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 18:22, Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wonder how C-c C-c with a prefix (supported are one to three C-u) on
> a time stamp in a table field is expected to behave. In my opinion it
> should not only adjust the day name but like before also evaluate the
> table formula which it does not now. If the user does not expect and
> check the missing logs of the table calculation update he might
> wrongly assume that it happened and assume that there has been just no
> change.
Michael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* bug#9695: allowed date range
[not found] ` <87ehyiitv7.fsf@googlemail.com>
@ 2012-03-23 1:30 ` Glenn Morris
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2012-03-23 1:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9695-done
Version: 24.1
Seems to have been fixed, but this bug was never closed, nor included on
the discussion. Ref thread
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2011-10/msg00439.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-03-23 1:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <87ty7kd8oh.fsf@kanis.fr>
2011-10-12 6:53 ` bug#9695: allowed date range Ivan Kanis
2011-10-13 7:28 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-13 7:48 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-13 7:57 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-13 8:02 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 10:15 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-13 8:27 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-10-13 10:14 ` Eric S Fraga
2011-10-13 13:04 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-10-16 13:45 ` Michael Brand
2011-11-09 18:18 ` Carsten Dominik
2011-11-09 21:32 ` Michael Brand
2011-11-03 17:22 ` Michael Brand
[not found] ` <87ehyiitv7.fsf@googlemail.com>
2012-03-23 1:30 ` Glenn Morris
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).