On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 9:38 AM, 'Terry Brown' via leo-editor <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Mar 2016 04:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
> "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ​T​
> his viewrendered refactoring would probably be a good thing to do
> in a branch


​I'm doing something drastically wrong if a branch is needed.​

​My intention is require minimal, if any, changes to existing code.​

​...​
> the design was for nested_splitter to be completely
> ​ ​
> Leo free
> ​, ...​
> with
> Leo specific stuff in free_layout.py.
>

​Oops.  The new code, if we decide to use it, should indeed be in
free_layout.py.


> The providers / factories are asked if they want to provide /
> manufacture the widget for an ID string, the first that accepts it gets
> to do it.  I think there's at least one case where the ID string
> contains additional information, like
> "__example:tbrown.20160317213437.1" for an Example pane using info.
> from the node with the gnx, but I'm not sure.
>

​Good to know.  ​


>
> I guess I'm really just thinking about the complexity of layout
> persistence, something to now break.
>

​Yeah, we can't have that.  The register_factory code is just a "rabbit"
that has allowed me to study the code.  It's completely expendable.

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.

Reply via email to