Add Neorg equivalent of Emacs' `org-fill-paragraph`

[melindachang]

Issues

• I have checked existing issues and there are no existing ones with the same request.

Feature description

Vim already has gw and gq to hard-wrap text to the value of textwidth, which seem to be functionally identical to Emacs' fill-paragraph. See the docs.

Emacs also has an editor command in org-mode called org-fill-paragraph. It performs the hard-wrapping in a way that's compatible with the org standard (i.e., doesn't wrap headings, metadata...), such that you can highlight and fill the entire document. Here's the implementation. It would be very nice for QOL to have some module in Neorg that does the same.

A few requirements that come to mind:

• Should skip headlines (i.e., no introducing line breaks or wrapping onto previous lines)
• Should wrap hyperlinks by displayed text, not the full address
• Should not wrap anything (?) enclosed in block indicators like @code <lang> or @document.meta

Help

Yes

Implementation help

Am willing to develop a module myself when I'm free, but I thought I would post in case anyone else is interested in getting this operational on a shorter timeline. Not super familiar with the entire Neorg spec, either - would appreciate additional suggestions for what to integrate.

[benlubas]

It's not exactly what you ask for, but https://github.com/benlubas/neorg-conceal-wrap does ignore headings, and doesn't merge list items together.

It doesn't account for code blocks and such.

The larger "but" is that it wraps based on concealed text width.

If anyone is thinking about contributing a similar feature. That plugin is probably a good place to start.

[melindachang]

It's not exactly what you ask for, but https://github.com/benlubas/neorg-conceal-wrap does ignore headings, and doesn't merge list items together.

It doesn't account for code blocks and such.

The larger "but" is that it wraps based on concealed text width.

If anyone is thinking about contributing a similar feature. That plugin is probably a good place to start.

Thanks for pointing this out - looks pretty good, actually. May take a stab at extending this one. Do you think it's worth incorporating into core or better off keeping development external?