My intended use of @root is to define parts of multple files from
within a
single node, and to deal with multiple comment styles within a single
file,
e.g., javascript embedded in html, SQL embedded in perl, etc.

To that end, I intend to:

* explore the current behavior of the code with unit tests

* propose new behavior using unit tests (the current behavior fails in
that
tangle can produce files that Leo fails to untangle).

* update Chapter 4 of the manual to reflect the changes.

* exercise @root untangle with unit tests: currently, untangle is only
tested for the cases where it is intended to introduce *no changes* to
the Leo file; clearly, it needs to be tested for for the cases where
it *should* introduce changes.

Leo currently sets the internal flags

use_raw_cweb_flag = use_noweb_flag = True
use_cweb_flag = False

The net effect is that, by not interpeting CWEB, Leo can write CWEB
files for use with the external CWEB toolset.  Because Leo imposes its
own interpretation on noweb syntax, it would be awkward to use Leo in
conjunction with the noweb toolset.

There is historic code that will never get triggered in the presence
of those flags; I'm not interested in exploring it.  It would simplify
understanding of the code if those portions were eliminated, but there
may be value to someone who would like to revisit the code for
CWEB-like code definition, so I'll let someone else do that.

I *do* intend to reflect the currently "hardcoded" behavior of Leo in
the
manual, without mentioning "inoperative" alternatives.

If I manage to make my way through the above, I'd like to get Leo to
satisfy the Fedora package requirements,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines and
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python We can build an RPM
now, but that's about requirement 2 in a list of several dozen (e.g.,
providing mimetypes, getting the icon associated with the file
extension).  The requirements are not arbitrary gotchas for Fedora;
for the most part, they move the application from experiment to
production and are relevant to any Linux platform, with the goal being
that a Fedora user can do "yum install leo" and then everything "just
works".  RPMs deal with dependencies, and will vary from one
distribution to another, but so long as you're not getting exotic in
the SPEC file (and we won't) the build for another distribution should
be very low effort.

If someone else would like to take that before I get to it, that would
be great!

-- 
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.

Reply via email to