Stefan Monnier <> writes:

>>> -       (org-eval-in-calendar '(setq cursor-type nil) t)
>>> +       ;; FIXME: Could we use `with-current-buffer' or do we really
>>> +       ;; need the `move-overlay' that's in `org-funcall-in-calendar'?
>>> +       (org-funcall-in-calendar (lambda () (setq cursor-type nil)) t)
>> `move-overlay' is important - this is additional decoration that Org
>> mode uses to indicate "current" date in the calendar while the focus is
>> on other window and the cursor may not be clearly visible.
> I understand it's important in general, but the question is for this
> specific use of `org-funcall-in-calendar` where all we do (apparently)
> is to set `cursor-type` which shouldn't require any change to the
> overlay (nor does it require to `select-window`), or should it?

No, it should not, and it does not require `select-window'.

> Along the same lines, maybe:
>       (progn
>         (calendar-forward-day (- (time-to-days org-def)
>                                  (calendar-absolute-from-gregorian
>                                   (calendar-current-date))))
>         (org-funcall-in-calendar #'ignore t)
>         (let* ((old-map (current-local-map))
>                (map (copy-keymap calendar-mode-map))
>                (minibuffer-local-map
> should turn into something like:
>       (let ((days (- (time-to-days org-def)
>                                  (calendar-absolute-from-gregorian
>                                   (calendar-current-date)))))
>         (org-funcall-in-calendar #'calendar-forward-day t days)
>         (let* ((old-map (current-local-map))
>                (map (copy-keymap calendar-mode-map))
>                (minibuffer-local-map
> so it's clear why we need to use `org-funcall-in-calendar`?

Yes. Looks reasonable.

>>> -(defun org-eval-in-calendar (form &optional keepdate)
>>> -  "Eval FORM in the calendar window and return to current window.
>>> +(defun org-funcall-in-calendar (func &optional keepdate &rest args)
>>> +  "Call FUNC in the calendar window and return to current window.
>> Why not a macro?  Having to write lambda may be awkward.
> [ Hmm... in my book, writing `lambda` should not be considered awkward.  ]
> So far there are only two uses of `org-funcall-in-calendar` which go
> through `lambda`, one of them is quoted and discussed above and the
> other is the backward compatibility wrapper `org-eval-in-calendar`, so
> I'm not sure it's worth the trouble.  But if you want, I can include
> a macro for it, of course.

Not necessary. Lambda is also ok, I just slightly prefer macro.
The only reason why I call lambda "awkward" is because it is more

Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <>.
Support Org development at <>,
or support my work at <>

Reply via email to