On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Terry Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 10:58:07 -0500 > Kent Tenney <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Whitespace wise that might be reasonable, but then that's not the >> > whitespace as I typed it, but as it ended up after Leo messed with it :-} >> >> I think consensus on a solution to whitespace management would >> be a good idea. >> >> Something like: one blank line between each @auto node > > Maybe, but to me the issue is that it's impossible to work out where text > between def/class blocks belongs. The python convention is to document > defs/classes inside themselves, i.e. the docstring. So with the exception of > @decorators, I'd say Leo should at least provide the option, if not the > default, of giving all inter def/class text its own node. Which will > sometimes result in an annoying number of nodes, but will never hide things.
Given lots of stray text between defs, I'd say annoyance is a good thing, it will discourage the poor coding style, while not hiding anything, I consider hiding worse than verbose annoyance. Given the exception that demands it, a node titled "Declaration" seems fine. It would seem to make sense to specifically address decorators, either with a node, or with a title like my_method (decorated) Another possible specific could be, for property declarations, the title "Property declaration" > > Cheers -Terry > > -- > 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.
