SETUPFILE: file open failure hardly noticeable

SETUPFILE: file open failure hardly noticeable

[Michael Brand]

Hi all

I had to experience that a #+SETUPFILE: pointing to a nonexisting file
results in not more than two times a (message) "Cannot read file
[...]" in the messages buffer which I didn't notice in the first
place. Only when I noticed that my custom todo keywords configuration
was missing I started to realize what happened. (The minibuffer
replaces those messages already after opening the file and I never
examine the Messages buffer at that time without reason.)

In the Org source code I found noerror for the two corresponding calls
of org-file-contents. I tried to make the load failure more prominent
but have to give up for the moment: When changing the (message) to
(error) or when adding a (ding) to the (message), in my case both
trigger new problems like hooks not called and messed up org-emphasis
or fontify. And the (error) is noticeable only hardly again because it
seems to me like catched by "File mode specification error", a
behavior by design which I don't understand.

Is there any opinion or help on how to improve this?

Michael

Re: SETUPFILE: file open failure hardly noticeable

[Bastien]

Hi Michael,

Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com> writes:

> Is there any opinion or help on how to improve this?

I used (sit-for 3) after the message to increase the odds
that the user gets it.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: SETUPFILE: file open failure hardly noticeable

[Michael Brand]

Hi Bastien

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> wrote:
> I used (sit-for 3) after the message to increase the odds
> that the user gets it.

I tried and had to see that (sit-for) has the same problems like
(ding) or (error) when used in org-file-contents. I noticed even one
more problem in addition to those mentioned in my previous post. Here
an updated list of the problems when an Org file is opened:
- some hooks are not called any more
- Viper mode is not entered any more
- messed up org-emphasis or fontify
They are probably all related with each other.

So I think that the change as it is today has to be reverted. More
thoughts have to be spent to understand why the above problems occur
and how to solve them. But this is beyond my current limits and I
might have to accept just the reverted situation.

Michael

Re: SETUPFILE: file open failure hardly noticeable

[Bastien]

Hi Michael,

Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com> writes:

> So I think that the change as it is today has to be reverted.

Done.  Let's digg this later on, thanks for your help on this.

-- 
 Bastien