Never mind - didn't see your response Edward.

Cheers -Terry

On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 10:53:04 -0500
"'Terry Brown' via leo-editor" <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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.

Reply via email to