Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> Rasmus <ras...@gmx.us> writes:
>
>> Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
>
>> Point is moved, though. If narrow shouldn't be "broken" then point
>> shouldn't be moved. I.e. no move when the definition is not within the
>> buffer.
>
> Fixed in 5954f6aa25b51a3a9a8f258fb0f15ef51be31366. Thank you.
>
>>> Outside of the most trivial case (i.e., jump back and forth between the
>>> definition and one of its references) it sounds like it would quickly
>>> get in the way.
>>
>> It would only work for the most trivial case I guess.
>
> This is why it is not worth implementing.
If it covers x%, for x large, of the realized usecases when working with a
narrowed buffer it's still "worth" it.
In any case, how about some of these alternative approaches to the issue
of handling footnotes from a narrowed buffer.
1. Retrieve the footnote in the minibuffer. E.g. org-footnote-action
shows the footnote-definition if it is outside of the narrow (and
known) in the minibuffer? E.g. 2. when using prefix.
2. Show the definition in the minibuffer as editable text (read input)
and update it if necessary.
3. A way to quickly get back to the previous narrow (this should
probably be an Emacs-core feature).
—Rasmus
--
Enough with the bla bla!
