On 03 Dec 2019, Adam Porter wrote: >You might consider adjusting your fontification settings. The >single-line outline path can be quite readable with the right faces (see >attached example).
That's a useful hint generally, thank you. However, for most of the Org Mode files I work with, the heading lengths are pretty long, so I need vertical stacking in the minibuffer when displaying all the headings down to point. >I'd recommend against adding more optional arguments to that function, >because it already has four. Emacs/Org already have enough problems >with code like (org-whatever nil t nil t nil nil t). Sure, I can see how that tradeoff might not be worth it. >> There should also be some way to access the new functionality >> interactively; the solution might be a new interactive wrapper >> function with its own name, or maybe some new variables? I don't >> know; I haven't thought it all the way through yet. > >> Is there any interest in or opposition to such a patch? I'd like to >> get a sense of whether it would be able to land in Org Mode before I >> start working on it. > >I'd recommend simply making a new interactive function, putting it in >your personal config, and sharing it publicly (e.g. here and on >/r/orgmode). Use it "in anger" for a while, and solicit feedback from >other users for a while. Then, if it still seems widely useful enough >to deserve being added to Org proper, apply what you've learned in the >meantime to improve and simplify its implementation before proposing a >patch. Well, I already posted it here, so that's done. Those functions are publicly packaged (albeit with the `ots-' prefix) here: https://github.com/OpenTechStrategies/ots-tools/blob/master/emacs-tools/ots.el Unless you meant make a new interactive function to display a vertical hierarchy and base it on the existing Org Mode functions you informed me of the existence of? But I don't think there's a way to do that without adding some new parameters to those existing functions, and, as you point out, that's probably not worth the extra complexity. >You might also consider sending it to my "unpackaged.el" repo, which >might make a good home for it: http://github.com/alphapapa/unpackaged.el That's a nice collection! I'm enjoying browsing through it. I effectively already have a personal unpackaged-elisp repository at https://svn.red-bean.com/repos/kfogel/trunk/.emacs (if these functions weren't already in 'ots-tools', they'd be there). Best regards, -Karl
