It was good to go on vacation--I had been feeling a bit burned out. It's even better to be back :-)
However, on my return I feel more strongly than ever that Leo is in all important respects complete. Certainly there are no items on the to-do or bug lists that will change Leo in any significant way. Furthermore, the prospect of doing "marketing" on Leo leaves me cold. All my projects, including Leo, started out as attempts to improve my personal programming practice, and to understand programming in general. The last 20+ years have seen several revolutions in programming and its tools. Python, the web, collaboration, etc. In most respects, the questions that puzzled me 20 years ago have been completely resolved. This is more than a little unsettling. It means that my old, happy, familiar, comfortable routines are likely to change. But I see no real alternative. It would be foolish to pretend that Leo needs major new work--it doesn't. Furthermore, it's way past Richard Hamming's 7-year time limit for research projects: http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html Of course, my situation is not exactly the same as a research scientist, but it's not entirely dissimilar either. In any case, my feeling is that it is indeed time for a change. Edward P.S. Of course there are nagging questions relating to Leo, but my sense is that they can not truly be resolved in a spectacularly clever way. Compare Leo with Mathematica. Each Mathematica document is self contained. In contrast, .leo files must produce sets of external files. This requirement complicates everything in fundamental ways. I wish .leo files could just *be* programs, but most people would find such a scheme unacceptable. 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.
