Hello, Adam Porter <a...@alphapapa.net> writes:
> I have some more code you might find useful. I had an idea to take a > different approach with my org-agenda-ng code (not using org-element to > parse the whole buffer first), and it seems to be working well so far. Clearly, `org-element-parse-buffer' is not adequate for the task. When buildings the agenda view, you're most probably interested in very specific parts of the document, whereas Element tries to be as thorough as possible. I suggest even to not use any org-element-* function there. > The code is here: > > https://github.com/alphapapa/org-agenda-ng/tree/non-element-parsing > > The code doesn't generate an identical result to the org-agenda code > (not yet, anyway), but it's very similar. It lacks the agenda prefix > feature and full application of agenda faces (it does do a few faces > already). Most, if not all, text properties are applied. And of > course, more work could be done to make it look more like an official > agenda buffer. I don't want to sound offending, but your 400 locs library cannot possibly be "very similar" to 10k locs org-agenda.el. Also, after a cursory look, it is not clear how you solve the multi-days issue. I.e., AFAIU, you still run multiple checks on the same entry. Nevertheless, I think your approach is right. I think that, at some point, we'll need to rewrite "org-agenda.el" from scratch, like we did for "org-export.el" a few years back, so it becomes manageable again. In the process, we definitely need to find a better replacement for `org-agenda-skip', as done in your library. So, in a nutshell, I think you're doing a step in the right direction. I hope Org can ultimately benefit from a better "org-agenda.el". My 2 cents, Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
