On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 05:20:40 -0500 "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:04 AM, 'Terry Brown' via leo-editor < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hmm, @command is a way of creating commands. Creating commands can > > shadow other commands, that's a given. I wouldn't change what > > @command does. I'm sure it would break a lot of personal config. > > > > How difficult would it be to change your config? In my experience, > it's fairly easy to get an unbounded recursion due to the collision > of names. Well, they're not all in a single config, some of them are file specific. It wouldn't be the end of the world, but... > If you think it unwise to change @command as I suggest, perhaps a > headline option, similar to @key, could be added for you. > > In other words, I really want x-@command :-) It would have helped > considerably while I was reviewing commands for the commands > reference. ... I agree with Kent in another post, you expect @command foo to create command `foo`. When you say x-@command would have helped when reviewing the docs., how so? Commands can be tagged in the docs. with an rst class, :cmd:`foo`, but I'm not sure if that's what you mean. Cheers -Terry > Edward > -- 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/d/optout.
