From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: How to set a date relative to the original date?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:35:28 -0500
Message-ID: <47D74170.1010707@gmail.com>
References: <47D6F919.10803@gmail.com> <87y78oopn0.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JZFsw-0001pz-3J
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:36:02 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JZFsu-0001oA-2E
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:36:01 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZFst-0001nx-RJ
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:35:59 -0400
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.245])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <wanrong.lin@gmail.com>) id 1JZFst-0000Ep-Da
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:35:59 -0400
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c25so803550ana.84
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:35:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <87y78oopn0.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Bastien Guerry wrote:
> Hi Wanrong,
>
> Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> writes:
>
>   
>> * MAYBE A test
>>  SCHEDULED: <2008-02-13 Wed>
>>
>> But I found "++3d" produces the same result as "+3d", which is 3 days
>> after today.
>>     
>
> AFAIK, the difference between +2d and ++2d is only relevant when
> *editing* the timestamp at point -- not when rescheduling with C-c C-s. 
>
> Maybe this should be the case.
>
>   
I tried again, and yes only with "C-c ." on an existing timestamp will 
the "++2d" work.
I agree it would be nice if this also works on "C-c C-s" and "C-c C-d", 
without changing the behavior of pressing "RET" after the prompt, which 
will set the date to today.

Wanrong