On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Terry Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
I'm not sure but I suspect your emphasis is intended to be humorous. > Or at least to underscore an important point by coming at it > > sideways :-) > Thanks for all your comments. I prefer exploration to "requirements", but discussions alternatives forms an important background to exploration. I suspect a reasonable course of action will emerge. To create more room for confusion :-} there's also now discussion of > more dynamic *code* reloading. I'm unclear as to whether this is for > Leo only, in which case it seems primarily a benefit to Leo developers, > or if it would cover other code being developed in Leo. Without any > standard way of doing the latter, I'm not sure how that would work. > Yeah. This question is why I suddenly got quite a bit *less* excited about #511: reload-leo command <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/511>. Yes, it should be possible to make Leo itself reloadable, but when developing *other* apps users will have to use the same techniques. I can't see any way of "inheriting" Leo's internal reload mechanism, whatever that may turn out to be. This is probably a deep difference between SmallTalk/Pharo and Python. 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.
