John Wiegley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bastien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> We could use the TODO keywords instead of "SEND" as a way to say that >> reaching a particular todo state should trigger some kind of action. > > How about just having generalized Lisp triggers: > > :PROPERTIES: > :TRIGGER: (lambda (previous new) > (if (string= (assoc "TODO" new) "DONE") > (org-find-and-schedule "regexp matching task" date))) > :END: > > In this example, previous and new are associative lists containing all of the > state information applicable to an entry.
Yes, I like this very much. We could have both a TRIGGER and a BLOCKER property. The first one would trigger actions on tasks. The second one wouldn't let a change appear on the task unless some tasks are in a specific state. I tried to figure out how we could emulate the job of the BLOCKER property with only TRIGGER and an option like `org-check-triggers', saying that the action the TRIGGER is supposed to perform won't be allowed if it's not performed *by the TRIGGER* itself -- therefore enabling us to use "rigid" TRIGGERS and some kind of dependencies checks. But I don't think it's really feasible -- not even a good idea. > This kind of mechanism would allow Carsten to come up with a small > library of org-mode Lisp functions for programmatically manipulating > tasks simply by specifying a regular expression, or a relative offset, > to "locate" them. Yes, sounds like a good idea. > I would far prefer this to a specialized syntax, which in the end would > require so complexity as to become a domain-specific language in itself. I do agree the syntax I proposed was somewhat bloat. Consider it brain-dust after excitment! -- Bastien _______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
