Here are my current thoughts w.r.t. work flow using Leo:

1) I will most definitely continue using Leo for the things I already use 
it for, where it is natural fit.

2) Now that Edward is getting a handle on the scroll issue, I have a better 
understanding of the performance issue related to syntax color and how the 
vr mode works, I am really looking forward to moving my documentation work 
into Leo to better take advantage of outlining and reST markup.

3) I will for now continue to use Emacs as my primary IDE. There are a 
couple of things that are lacking with Leo here: 
a) is the strength of Leo is also a weakness. In Emacs since the text is 
not structured every buffer is also an editor. I can easily dump program 
output into a buffer and do post processing or impromptu search. In Leo the 
outline is the central focus. For example I don't know how to search for 
things in the log pane if that capability does exist.
b) is the lack of an inferior python (or other language) processes to 
enable REPL development. Scripting is nice but I don't really want to run 
real code in my editor python, with name pollution and real possibilities 
of occasional crashes.
c) is the lack of dabbrev support for now. codewise is impressive but when 
I am writing new code dabbrev really makes it easier to use meaningful 
names.

4) Leo is a great tool for refactoring and I plan to take advantage of 
that. I also plan to keep much larger source files instead of arbitrarily 
splitting source codes into many files. Leo will make navigation easy. I 
will most likely use the @auto mode instead of @shadow (thanks Terry for 
the suggestions!) and frequently move between Emacs and Leo (with some vim 
sessions sprinkled in as appropriate).

As I learn more about Leo my approach will surely evolve along with Leo.

On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 6:56:44 PM UTC-7, Terry wrote:
>
>
> > Now 
> > if I use @asis trees instead so I don't see sentinels -- does that mean 
> > that I won't be able to edit the code in an external program and have 
> the 
> > changes reflected back in Leo? 
>
> Yes, but there's also the @shadow and @auto nodes.  @auto reads plain 
> source code so mixing editors is straight forward (given the usual 
> potential for overwriting changes with multiple simultaneous edits of 
> the same file).  But @auto doesn't allow you to use Leo's code outline 
> organization features to the same degree.  @shadow does, it keeps the 
> Leo info. in a separate shadow file, so the source is still plain.  But 
> it's probably not that heavily used. 
>
> I use @auto and if needed the features of the bookmarks.py plugin. 
>
> Cheers -Terry 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/leo-editor/-/JsVmMYvHMGwJ.
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