On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:40 PM, 'Terry Brown' via leo-editor <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
> I'm not sure that the current implementation is a great choice for on
> by default.
>

​It's beginning to look that way.​


>
> John knows what's causing his problem, because it started when he
> flipped the setting.  If it was on be default, working out why Leo's
> laggy would be hard, maybe you'd notice it was related to file access
> over a network, maybe not.
>

​I agree: it would be best to have an implementation that scales better.​


Also, I find the immediate notification of change a bit intrusive, vs.
> only notifying when Leo regains focus, like Notepad++.


​It should be easy enough to queue notices if Leo is not active, and raise
them all when Leo activates. This can be done with a single dialog, similar
to the dialog that warns that various files may already be open in another
copy of Leo.

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 https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to