On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> wrote: > On May 8, 3:58 pm, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote: >> In this thread I'm going to do some blue-sky thinking. > > This has been an enjoyable conversation. Many thanks to all who have > contributed. Every comment was useful. > > Here is a summary of my thinking on this topic. > > 1. Kent's remark about sentinels == niche has been the driving force > in my thoughts for 15+ years. I would dearly like to find away around > sentinels, but I don't believe that is possible, or even wise in > general. Indeed, sentinels are *real* and *essential* data for > representing outline structure in external files. Alas, this is an > inescapable conclusion.
What about @shadow? > > 2. The essence of the problem is that some people do not care about > outline structure and the benefits they create. I'd disagree, I feel like my @auto / sentinel-free workflow offers me _many_ outline structure benefits, and I care a lot about them. > Alas, if people object > to sentinels, they are, in effect, making it impossible for those who > *want* to share outline structure to do so easily. In particular, > neither @shadow nor @auto allow me to share my outline data with you. > > In short, those who object to sentinels make it impossible to share > outline data in external files. Right. I suppose an example is the Leo source code, which requires sentinels to support clones and sections and ... You of course require that capability, it's a big part of why you spent these years developing Leo. So, I'm happy, you're happy, with Leo as it is. My whinging is misplaced, my needs are met, I tend to forget this, and see red, when sentinels are discussed. I think what put the bee back in my is when I'm impatient and do $ less leo/core/xxx.py the sentinels make the files look terrible. I imagine the prospective Leo user doing this and being discouraged, drawing the kind of erroneous conclusions I tend to promulgate with my sentinel rants. Don't @shadow files solve all this? Couldn't the Leo src files be @shadow and offer the best of both worlds; pristine source and full-feature Leo? I don't remember the details of @shadow ... Thanks, Kent > > Edward > > P.S. Notes: > > We can imagine tools (editors and diffs) that hide sentinels from > view, but such an approach will likely not be a realistic possibility. > > @auto and @shadow have their own strengths and weaknesses. �...@auto is > "lighter" and quicker, but it does not support clones nor does it > remember organizer nodes: you get exactly what the import code gives > you. �...@shadow is much more capable, but it is slower: Leo must read > and write twice as many files. But these tradeoffs are largely > irrelevant to this discussion: only by sharing the private @shadow > files could people share outline data. > > In some environments, such as Mathematica, there are no external > files. In that case, it's possible to represent outlines (that is > Mathematica Notebooks) using something isomorphic to Leo's .leo > files. In Mathematica's case the representation is called an > expression. Simply adding an id to Cell expression would suffice to > represent clones. If Leo never created external files, then .leo > files would work just like Mathematica .nb files and there would be no > problem. > > As I was thinking about this problem I realized that one could build > in an @shadow-like algorithm to update @nosent files based on diffs. > In effect, the data in the .leo file becomes the private file. I see > no real advantage to such a scheme, but it is a cute idea all the > same. > > EKR > > -- > 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. > > -- 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.
