Sounds cool. You should do it.
On Mar 2, 9:44 am, edgimar <[email protected]> wrote:
> What does anyone think about the idea of having @leo nodes, which can
> include .leo files?
>
> Then, since a .leo file just represents a set of top-level nodes, the
> children of this @leo node would simply be all of the top-level nodes
> in the .leo file. Of course there would need to be checks done to
> prevent recursive loops, but it could (would) be a powerful way of
> using leo.
>
> If such a capability were to be implemented, I could see the benefit
> of two related operations: (1) an operation which would turn an @leo
> node into a normal node (i.e. if the @leo node in x.leo referred to
> y.leo, then all of the contents of y.leo would be incorporated into
> x.leo, and the reference to y.leo would be removed), and (2) an
> operation which would allow any node to be turned into an @leo node
> (i.e. removing the node's contents from x.leo, and creating a y.leo
> file which is now only referred to in x.leo).
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"leo-editor" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
