Am Sun, 15 Nov 2020 08:48:56 -0300 schrieb Gustavo Barros <gtv...@gmail.com>:
> Hi All, > > On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 at 13:37, Greg Minshall <minsh...@umich.edu> > wrote: > > > hi, all. > > > > David Rogers <davidandrewrog...@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. > Thank you for clearing that up! Detlef