Even if the behavior doesn't change (soon), could the equivalent of the
following be implemented in org-mode? It's the only place where this has
been problematic for me.
(defadvice org-beginning-of-line (after smart-point-adjustment activate)
(setq disable-point-adjustment
(or (not (invisible-p (point)))
(not (invisible-p (max (point-min) (1- (point))))))))
(defadvice org-end-of-line (after smart-point-adjustment activate)
(setq disable-point-adjustment
(or (not (invisible-p (point)))
(not (invisible-p (max (point-min) (1- (point))))))))
Evgeni
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:27 PM, E Sabof <[email protected]> wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better if forward/backward-char kept the old behavior, and
> the rest of the commands did something similar to this in the end:
>
> (setq disable-point-adjustment
> (preceding-or-following-character-visible-p))
>
> I'm not entirely sure whether it would be better, but at the moment, I
> can't think of a case where it wouldn't.
>
> Evgeni
>
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Eli Zaretskii <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 12:17:35 +0100
>> > From: E Sabof <[email protected]>
>> > Cc: [email protected]
>> >
>> > I see what you mean. But it still looks like a bug - whether I follow
>> the
>> > above recipe, or press C-e C-a, the point will (should?) go to the same
>> > position, but the behavior is different.
>>
>> The behavior depends on the direction point was moving before ending
>> up in the invisible text. It's a heuristic, and as every heuristic,
>> it sometimes fails.
>>
>
>
