>From a Leo user's perspective, I see the @ignore directive as a means to instruct the user of the file to ignore that node's content. One way to do this is to not write the node's content to the file. If the file's user is a person then that is a sure way to insure that the content is ignored. However, if the user of the file is a software compiler (or interpreter or ....) then the compiler can be told to ignore the node's content by using the compiler's built in "ignore" feature, namely the compiler's support for ignoring lines that have been commented out.
Why not provide support for the @ignore directive in @thin nodes by writing the node's body text and the body text of its sub-nodes out to the file as commented lines. The logic for commenting out lines is already implemented in part to support the @doc directive? Why not just use the @doc directive? It can only be used within the body text. As a result, there is no indication in the outline that the node is being "ignored" and there is no support for having the sub- nodes also ignored when their parent node is "ignored". Yes, I can put @doc/@code directives in the body text and put an @ignore directive in the node's header (that Leo does nothing with) but it's a lot of keystrokes and prone to user mistakes. Also, I assume another advantage to having support for the @ignore directive in @thin files would be better support for converting files types with @ignore directives to an @thin file and and back again. TL --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
