From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: org-clock-report/org-create-dblock breaks drawers with point on headine? Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 13:29:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87pog0zpw5.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87bmrkx5xg.fsf@alphapapa.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37609) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d2yfH-0001FO-On for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 07:29:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d2yfG-00044b-ST for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 07:29:51 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::196]:50736) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d2yfG-00043v-Lk for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 07:29:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87bmrkx5xg.fsf@alphapapa.net> (Adam Porter's message of "Tue, 25 Apr 2017 03:11:39 -0500") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Adam Porter Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Adam Porter writes: > I feel like I must be missing something obvious, but doesn't > org-clock-report, which calls org-create-dblock, break drawers and > planning lines when it's called with point on a heading? It inserts the > clocktable above the existing drawers and planning line, making them > invalid. That's true, but so does `org-insert-drawer', for example. I'm not a big fan of preventing users from shooting them on the foot. Nevertheless, there are three possibilities to consider: 1. insert the dynamic block (or the drawer) at point, or below if it would break planning line or property drawer; 2. raise an error when we try to insert it where it would break planning line or property drawer; 3. insert it at point. Let the user sort it out as they know better than us what they want. Option 3 is already implemented (or is it a non-implementation?). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou