Max Mikhanosha writes:
> I've had commit access (for sticky agenda), so unless someone removed
> me I should still have it.
Yes, you still have it.
> The reason I did not commit it directly, that its kind of innocent
> looking change but in the sensitive area of the code, so I wanted more
> eye
At Sat, 29 Sep 2012 08:21:08 +0200,
Bastien wrote:
>
> Max Mikhanosha writes:
>
> > Following patch changes (org-agenda-change-all-lines) to call
> > (org-agenda-finalize) for each line changed, with agenda buffer
> > narrowed to just that line, and it speeds up redisplay of current item
> > a l
Looks great, and I see no reasons why this should break anything.
- Carsten
On 28.9.2012, at 19:01, Max Mikhanosha wrote:
> I had noticed that with large agendas (several hundred items), any
> command that changes and re-displays the current item is slow. For
> example something like changing pr
Hi Max,
Max Mikhanosha writes:
> Following patch changes (org-agenda-change-all-lines) to call
> (org-agenda-finalize) for each line changed, with agenda buffer
> narrowed to just that line, and it speeds up redisplay of current item
> a lot, the Shift-Up changing of priority can almost keep up
I had noticed that with large agendas (several hundred items), any
command that changes and re-displays the current item is slow. For
example something like changing priority with Shift-Up/Down key, can
take a second or two.
Most of that time is spent in (org-agenda-finalize) call, which is
respon
