Indeed if this is a valid use case for buffer identification, the approach in the patch seems trivial (to me, buffer locals are more appropriate than dynamic bindings), if overkill for the purpose I proposed.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2025 at 7:16 AM Jens Schmidt <jschmidt4...@vodafonemail.de> wrote: > On 2025-01-18 12:38, Ihor Radchenko wrote: > > Ship Mints <shipmi...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> Yes, could do, and nothing needed by org-mode or markdown-mode. Could > also > >> test for buffer-file-name nil. Or test both. Let's recommend that > simpler > >> approach and I will rescind my markdown PR in favor of this simpler > >> suggestion. > > > > Well. Org or markdown should name the buffers according to the > > convention :) Org does it though. So, we should be good. > > > > Closing the patch request. > > Canceled. > > Um, sorry for butting in, but I also have an interest of recognizing > Org's special source environments, see here: > > > https://list.orgmode.org/9eaf7099554d488d921e64c4b2852...@vodafonemail.de/ > > That thread led to nowhere back then, but I think it still makes > sense to have the various Org source environments detectable in > a defined and explicit way, and Stephane's request reminded me > about that. > > While one could use buffer names also for detecting the source edit > buffers ("*Org Src collateral.org[ shell ]*"), it feels somehow > brittle, since names can change. So why not extend on Stephane's > request and provide some variable that informs about the various > types of Org source environments? > > Like a variable named `org-src-environment-type' bound dynamically > to possible values, e.g. `edit' or `fontify'? > > Thanks! (In particular also for taking the responsibility of Org > maintenance.) > >
