On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:22 AM, Geoff Evans <gtevan...@nl.rogers.com> wrote: > A good test is both (a) an illustration of something the program should do; (b) an ability to detect if the program isn't doing it. In this light, tests appear as helpers toward understanding rather than obstacles to be overcome.
Interesting notion. > Why don't more people use Leo (or more of its capabilities)? ...one part of the answer is that the documentation is hard to use. Maybe, but there are more plausible reasons. First, millions of programmers get their start on emacs. Because their mates use emacs, they can easily get their questions answered. They can literally look over the friend's shoulder. Second, emacs org-mode is good enough (for emacs users). It isn't Leo, but for at least four years has had powerful scripting capabilities, which in some ways are Leo's equal or better. Third, because there are so many emacs and org-mode users, the resources available to them are immense. For example, this org-mode tutorial video <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgizHHd7nOo>, and this longer one <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzA2YODtgK4>. I haven't watched either tutorial yet. I will as preparation for developing new Leo videos. > [Docs should invite, guide, serve as a reference] All reasonable goals. How do you propose to test them? 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 leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
