Re: Changed list indentation behavior: how to revert?

[David Rogers]

Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:

> * David Rogers <davidandrewrogers@gmail.com> [2020-11-15 01:44]:
> > Hello
> >
> > After reading several of the responses to this, I’ve started to 
> > wonder: Is
> > electric-indent-mode broken for everybody because it contains a 
> > bug or
> > design flaw, or is electric-indent-mode working fine but simply 
> > not suitable
> > for every situation?
> >
> > In other words, where is the “right” place to fix this problem?
>
> It was working in Org file automatically well and fine.
>
> As if user decides to indent, electric-indent would help the 
> user:
>
> ** HeadingRET
>
> At this point below user may decide to indent:
>
>    - First itemRET after RET
>    ^
>    - the new line appears here
>
> User has to move the cursor to the point shown above for 
> indentation
> to begin. That is good as user decides it and it is text, it is 
> not
> programming language with special convention for indentation.
>
> Electric indent mode always worked like that, including in Org 
> mode
> without any problems.
>
> The change that is introduced in my opinion, and I did not look 
> into
> code, is changing how electric indent mode behaves specifically 
> for
> Org mode as somebody assumes that immediately after headingRET 
> the new
> lines should be indented, like if there is some special 
> indentation
> convention for Org mode.
>
> So without user deciding to indent, it does following:
>
> ** HeadingRET
>    - First line here
>    
> But there is no indentation convetion for Org mode of that kind 
> that I
> know.
>
> The Org file shown on https://orgmode.org/ does not follow that 
> type
> of indenting.
>
> Common indenting in Org mode is:
>
> * Heading
> Text
> ** Heading
> Text
> *** Heading text
> Text
> **** Heading
> Text here
> ***** Heading
> Text
> ****** Heading
> Text
>
> AND if somebody likes to indent differently electric indent mode 
> would help.
>
> Common indenting is not (other may tell me that I am wrong if 
> this statement is wrong)
>
> * Heading
>   Text
> ** Heading
>    Text
> *** Heading text
>     Text
> **** Heading
>      Text here
> ***** Heading
>       Text
> ****** Heading
>        Text
>
> The above change was introduced as default to many users and is 
> not
> conveniente.
>
> Especially not conveniente I find that I need to delete by using
> backspace all the spaces inserted that I did not want after 
> pressing
> RET after inserting heading.
>
> Some people will insert ONLY heading as a test without any text.

Thank you! You’ve really explained this clearly, and I understand 
your point.
Am I crazy to say that your last example of unwanted behavior is 
easier for me to read and understand? (and to me the common 
indenting is a hopeless mess?)

But I can see potential problems with it too - a long paragraph on 
a narrow screen would become hard to read and edit if there were 
very many indent levels. And I have no idea how code blocks would 
be affected because I don’t write any real code.

If the new behavior really does what you showed under “Common 
indenting is not…”, then I think I prefer the new way for my own 
use. And it makes sense to me that it should automatically work 
like that. I think the cursor jumping all the way back to the left 
margin after I’ve created a multi-starred heading makes no sense. 
But I’m also likely to forget to consider things that might go 
wrong with implementing a new plan, so I’m not a great judge.

Does the new behavior “break” something for you (causing errors 
etc), or does it just look wrong?

--
David Rogers