emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Changed list indentation behavior: how to revert?


From: Gustavo Barros
Subject: Re: Changed list indentation behavior: how to revert?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 08:48:56 -0300
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)

Hi All,

On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 at 13:37, Greg Minshall <minshall@umich.edu> wrote:

> hi, all.
>
> David Rogers <davidandrewrogers@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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?)
>
> yes, in fact, the "new" way sort of has the buffer indentation match
> that of the outline structure of the file (specified by asterisks).
> there's a lot to be said for that.  (though, obviously, it's not what
> everyone would want.)
>
> if the new mode stays as the standard, maybe we'd want to capture an
> asterisk typed immediately after a newline that would (by default), put
> that line-beginning asterisk back in column one?
>
> otherwise, this is what one gets (without remembering to do a C-j
> instead of <RET>):
> -----
> * i wanted a headline<RET>
>   * i wanted a subhead, but it's ignored by org mode
> -----
> which is maybe not optimal?
>
> in most non-org modes (including in Org Src... buffers, and in org files
> when writing org-mode lists), i'm a big fan of electric indent mode.
>
> maybe an org-specific setting, "org-file-indent-follows-structure"?  if
> true, it means the user wants to have a "raw" org document laid out
> according to the outline structure of the document.  if false, it means
> one, in general, wants the org file laid out with left-alignment (or,
> right, in right-to-left) languages (not including embedded lists, and
> whatever else i might be ignoring).
>
> cheers, Greg

I'm quite surprised by the reaction to this issue, because
`electric-indent-mode' *does not change Org's indentation settings*, it
just applies them alongside RET.  Which makes me think that those who've
been so bitten by it where actually manually overriding (their own)
settings in this area by never applying indentation.  If that's your
case, you'd probably be very surprised of running `org-indent-region' in
your documents (don't do it, I don't want to break them).

In particular, one "surprising" result of the "new behavior" is that of
indentation after a heading.  That was already and continues to be
controlled by the user option `org-adapt-indentation'.  If you don't
want your content to be indented after a heading, set it to nil.  And
`electric-indent-mode' should do what you expect in this regard. 

I'm not sure if thus overriding your own (or Org's, if you prefer)
indentation settings by selectively applying indentation is a sane
approach, so perhaps `electric-indent-mode' may help you discipline your
editing to your benefit.  And make you more conscious of Org
indentation.  Especially because indentation is not a "free variable" in
Org, it is a syntactical aspect of an Org document and, conspicuously,
is critical to the definition of a heading and of plain lists.

An example from Greg:

> -----
> * i wanted a headline<RET>
>   * i wanted a subhead, but it's ignored by org mode
> -----

That's because the first one is indeed a heading, and the second is not,
it is a plain list item.  By definition a heading must start at the
left margin.

You (plural) could probably also get some juice from looking into, and
incorporating to muscle memory, `M-RET', `C-RET' and `C-j'.

Of course, with that said, if you really don't like
`electric-indent-mode' for Org, you can disable it as described in the
Org News, previously linked to in this thread.  There is ground to
prefer this, particularly for the list case, mentioned by Karl in the
original message of this thread.  But `electric-indent-mode' does not
induce a new pattern of indentation for Org, it just applies your
settings in this area, whose defaults have not changed of recent, as far
as I recall.

Finally, the "change" was not brought about by Org, but by Emacs.  Org
just (belatedly) tagged along.

Best regards,
Gustavo.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]