[O] bug#35453: 26.1; Poor performance of vertical-motion in large org buffer
> There are no intervals in this story. The way overlays are > implemented, they don't use intervals (if by that you mean the > facilities in intervals.c). Someone was working on making overlays > more efficient by changing the low-level implementation details, but > that work is yet unfinished. I see. Hope that overlays will be optimised eventually... Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Ihor Radchenko >> Cc: 35...@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Sun, 05 May 2019 09:05:46 +0800 >> >> > Of course, if someone comes up with ideas how to speed up >> > vertical-motion without changing what Org does with overlays and/or >> > how overlays are implemented, such ideas will be most welcome. >> >> Rather dumb idea. >> Currently, vertical-motion just loops over all the intervals in the >> buffer. What if we optimise next-single-char-property-change and use it >> in vertical-motion? Say, the interval data structure can extended. In >> addition to the currently available pointers to next and previous >> intervals, each (or just 'invisible') property of the interval might >> also contain a pointer to next/previous interval with different property >> value. Then, by increasing the structure size a bit, we can >> significantly speed up the buffer motion commands. > > There are no intervals in this story. The way overlays are > implemented, they don't use intervals (if by that you mean the > facilities in intervals.c). Someone was working on making overlays > more efficient by changing the low-level implementation details, but > that work is yet unfinished.
Re: [O] Structured links to headings with endless depth
> There must be good reasons why some more > users than just me sometimes prefer the format B over A: Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification. Best, Ihor Michael Brand writes: > Hi Ihor > > On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 5:27 AM Ihor Radchenko wrote: > >> I am wondering why you are strictly against ID properties. > > To me this looks like a misunderstanding. I use the ID often but my > weighting of the different advantages is not the same in all cases. > Some situations where no ID can be seen as an advantage: Looking at > the raw view (for example visible-mode during ediff), looking at the > raw file (when in the other world outside of Org mode), the time it > can take to not find an ID in all the ID files when the target file or > ID is not accessible, etc. There must be good reasons why some more > users than just me sometimes prefer the format B over A: > > #+name: A > #+begin_src org > - [[id:8e5c5d87-291e-469b-a8e4-15704610c82c][The heading name]] > ,* The heading name > :PROPERTIES: > :ID: 8e5c5d87-291e-469b-a8e4-15704610c82c > :END: > #+end_src > > #+name: B > #+begin_src org > - [[*The heading name]] > ,* The heading name > #+end_src > > Michael
[O] html export of latex table
Hello,
I noticed that the html export does not export correctly the following
table, although it does if I wrap it in a table environment. I also
tried some other table environment such a longtable and noticed that
somehow the environment name gets hijacked \begin{longtable}
becomes \begin{longtable*}.
I you are struggling with the same issue you can get away with #+LATEX_HEADER:
\newenvironment{longtable*}[][]{\begin{longtable}}{\end{longtable}}
for the time being. :-).
Best regards,
Jeremie
** export go through not correctly.
#+begin_src latex :results raw
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c }
\toprule
& pooled & ind & ind+time & mundlak & within \\
\midrule
Intercept & $43.95^{***}$ & $37.48^{***}$ & $36.35^{***}$ & $34.41$ &
$87.96^{***}$ \\
& $(5.68)$ & $(7.47)$ & $(9.08)$ & $(39.06)$&
$(5.94)$ \\
score & $5.03^{***}$ & $5.10^{***}$ & $4.88^{***}$ & $4.88^{***}$ &
$4.88^{***}$ \\
& $(1.16)$ & $(1.19)$ & $(1.24)$ & $(1.21)$ &
$(1.22)$ \\
score-i& & & & $-2.30$ &
\\
& & & & $(6.94)$ &
\\
score-t& & & & $4.60$ &
\\
& & & & $(5.50)$ &
\\
\midrule
R$^2$ & 0.16 & 0.18 & 0.19 & 0.17 &
0.14 \\
Adj. R$^2$ & 0.15 & 0.14 & 0.11 & 0.14 &
0.13 \\
Num. obs. & 100 & 100 & 100 & 100 &
100 \\
RMSE & 23.90 & 24.13 & 24.55 & 24.04&
24.20 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
#+end_src
** exports correctly
#+begin_src latex :results raw
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c }
\toprule
& pooled & ind & ind+time & mundlak & within \\
\midrule
Intercept & $43.95^{***}$ & $37.48^{***}$ & $36.35^{***}$ & $34.41$ &
$87.96^{***}$ \\
& $(5.68)$ & $(7.47)$ & $(9.08)$ & $(39.06)$&
$(5.94)$ \\
score & $5.03^{***}$ & $5.10^{***}$ & $4.88^{***}$ & $4.88^{***}$ &
$4.88^{***}$ \\
& $(1.16)$ & $(1.19)$ & $(1.24)$ & $(1.21)$ &
$(1.22)$ \\
score-i& & & & $-2.30$ &
\\
& & & & $(6.94)$ &
\\
score-t& & & & $4.60$ &
\\
& & & & $(5.50)$ &
\\
\midrule
R$^2$ & 0.16 & 0.18 & 0.19 & 0.17 &
0.14 \\
Adj. R$^2$ & 0.15 & 0.14 & 0.11 & 0.14 &
0.13 \\
Num. obs. & 100 & 100 & 100 & 100 &
100 \\
RMSE & 23.90 & 24.13 & 24.55 & 24.04&
24.20 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
#+end_src
** long table export crash
#+begin_src latex :results raw
\begin{longtable}{@{*}r||p{1in}@{*}}
KILLED & LINE \kill
\caption[An optional table caption ...]{A long table\label{long}}\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{2}{@{*}c@{*}}%
{This part appears at the top of the table}\\
\textsc{First}&\textsc{Second}\\
\hline\hline
\endfirsthead
\caption[]{(continued)}\\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{2}{@{*}c@{*}}%
{This part appears at the top of every other page}\\
\textbf{First}&\textbf{Second}\\
\hline\hline
\endhead
\hline
This goes at the&bottom.\\
\hline
\endfoot
\hline
These lines will&appear\\
in place of the & usual foot\\
at the end& of the table\\
\hline
\endlastfoot
\env{longtable} columns are specified& in the \\
same way as in the \env{tabular}& environment.\\
...
\multicolumn{2}{||c||}{This is a ...}\\
...
Some lines may take...&
\raggedleft This last column is a ‘‘p’’ column...
\tabularnewline
...
Lots of lines& like this.\\
...
\hline
Lots\footnote{...} of lines& like this.\\
Lots
of
lines& like this\footnote{...}\\
\hline
Lots of lines& like this.\\
...
\end{longtable}
#+end_src
