On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Kent Tenney <[email protected]> wrote:
If ONLY there was a way to survey the demands of current and > future Leo users: I think you would find your expectations to be > outliers. Those of us who use and love @auto have no > need for the magic @file offers, we want to edit text with access > to Leo's organizational and scripting power. That's more than enough. > Thanks for all these comments. It sounds like you have concluded that @auto is not, and can > > not, be for YOU. > > > Correct. Not without improvements that seem infeasible. I know @auto is for me, and, I suspect, for others not looking > for a Leonine > ... > experience. > > The only annoyance I experience is the @nocolor, > @language lines (a belated thanks for p.script) and the improvement > which excites me is the persisted UAs. > Supporting uA's will be part of the new @auto. It will be done asap. Using uA's to eliminate Leo directives could be called a preference. I'll add an option for that. Please don't reject @auto improvements because @auto cannot > duplicate the capability of @file, that is making the perfect > enemy of the great. > I'll continue to improve @auto, both the fundamental importers and the new @auto (@views-based) code. There is plenty of room for simplification. Otoh, elegance can never work around missing information. Edward P.S. In hindsight, the problems with the @auto importers should have been obvious. In fact, they became apparently only after wrestling with with actual code. EKR -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
