Re: [POLL] Should we accept breaking changes to get rid of Org libraries that perform side effects when loading?

[Russell Adams]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:44:29AM +0000, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> Bastien Guerry <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
> >> ************************* TODO Consider explaining more about X
> >> <paragraph N>
> >>
> >> <...>
> >>
> >> Then, I can easily review the manuscript status using sparse tree or
> >> agenda view.
> >
> > I see -- but what is the real benefit of inline tasks here over normal
> > tasks?  I understand that <paragraph N> should not be considered as
> > the details for a task, but rather its "target", but inline task does
> > not seem to add much here.
>
> The benefit is that I do not need to search for that "paragraph N" when
> I want to work on the task. I simply jump to the task location and can
> immediately see the paragraph it refers to.
>
> Also, pdf export of such inlinetask will nicely mark the TODO item in
> the manuscript draft, so that I can print things, and still see what
> should be done in that particular location of the manuscript.

Interesting. I often will use comments when I need to update things in
a document to be exported.

* Item

Wubba lubba ding dong.

# TODO fix this to pig latin

Arff!!

* Other stuff


Doesn't this really come down to a use case for having headings which
are excluded from operations like comments are?

Could we treat #'s as inline headings? Not sure how that'd handle
drawers.



------------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Adams                            RLAdams@AdamsInfoServ.com
                                    https://www.adamsinfoserv.com/