On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 7:47 PM, gatesphere <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 3/25/2016 8:25 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 4:14 PM, 'Terry Brown' via leo-editor < > <[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote: > Furthermore, why not have the "id" be > WhateverProvider.__class__.__name__? This works provided that each > Provider class actually has a distinct name. > > What do you think? Would it be somehow inconvenient to dispense with the > Provider classes? > > The details are murky now, but I remember a while back fixing a few bugs > when viewrendered2 came about -- IIRC, the various help/docstring/plugin > docs commands pretty much expect there to be a single vr pane. I have no > idea if that's still the case. > It sure looks that way to me. BTW, the subtle differences between VR and VR2 are making my head spin. I'm thinking that one way forward would be to base VR2 on VR. That is, VR2 would use import leo.plugins.viewrendered and use the VR version of ViewRenderedController, perhaps with a mode bit, or just monkey patching the VR html_class ivar. In other words, I would really like the only difference between the VR and VR2 plugins to be the value of the html_class ivar. I'm not sure that makes sense, but it sure doesn't make sense to have two different almost-but-not-quite-identical ViewRenderedController classes! Peter Mills, if you are following this, I'd like your comments. 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 https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
