On Wednesday, October 9, 2024 at 7:13:18 AM UTC-4 [email protected] 
wrote:

[email protected] schrieb am Dienstag, 8. Oktober 2024 um 01:55:20 UTC+2:

Viktor, I've got all these cases of the missing VR/VR3 taken care of but 
before I push the changes up where you can try them, I'd appreciate your 
thoughts on a few things.


   - I assume this means that VR & VR3 do NOT have to be enabled at the 
   same time in the future. - Correct ?

Yes, that's right.  Either one or both can be enabled.
 

First, I have followed the way that the current system creates layouts that 
include VR or VR3.  They set up a place for it but don't actually put 
VR/VR3 into it and show the widget unless it's already open and shown. It 
seems to me that if one asks for a layout that includes VR/VR3 that they 
would expect VR/VR3 will immediately be visible in that layout.  What do 
you think?


   - Should VR/VR3 'content' be immediately visible - or - should the user 
   explicitly request it ?
   - For me this is not an OR - but - an AND ! - I believe there are 
   situations (e.g. single screen / small laptop, etc.) where the user should 
   be able to toggle to save 'screen estate'.

Yes, that's how I work.  The commands "vr-toggle" and "vr3-toggle" switch 
them in and out of visibility.
 

Second, I have some layouts that use VR and some that use VR3.  I think 
that these layouts should (like, for example, "Big Tree") should open with 
VR3 if available otherwise with VR.  That will be a little tricky to 
arrange but I think it can be done.  Do you have an opinion here?



   - If VR3 is enabled, should it be prioritized over VR ?
   - I don't have a strong opinion on this issue - but - somehow it feels 
   'strange' to me to put plugin - dependencies / relationships into Leo's 
   core code.

This dependency is already in the core - F11 and some of the other 
"help-for" commands use VR3 for display if enabled, otherwise they use VR. 
I am concerned that having a "VR version and a "VR3" version of each layout 
would be confusing and cause cluttered menus.  This is not a technical 
programming matter, of course. I have devised a small code change that can 
optionally (that is, a layout writer can choose to use the feature or not) 
use VR3 if enabled, VR otherwise. I've proposed a PR to add this feature, 
and we can see if it causes anyone problems.
 

The third thing I would welcome your opinion on is about which layouts 
should be included in the core code vs which ones could be defined in 
@settings tree.  The Layout-Demo outline uses a mix of both. My thinking is 
that some layouts may only be useful to a few users (like me or you!) 
whereas others would see more widespread use. Of course new layouts can be 
created by anyone - if they can do the small amount of scripting - and put 
into an @settings tree. I'm unsure where to draw the line between core 
commands and non-core ones.  What is your opinion?



   - Which ~ layouts ~ should be offered / provided by Leo's core ?
   - I tried out all layouts currently offered by Leo's core. - See 
   "Log-001" below
   - IMO 'layout-big-tree' & 'layout-vertical-thirds2' are quite special - 
   and - could be just documented as examples.

I included all the layouts the Edward had already built in ... although 
it's hard for me to see how to use some of them as a practical matter.  I 
also included the layout I prefer to start out with, as well as one to swap 
the log frame between the main and secondary splitters.  If anyone can come 
up with any others, it's easy enough to create them.  New ones can be added 
to one's myLeoSettings.leo file without needing to change Leo's core code 
at all.

Edward added code so that the plugin controller can know about the new 
module.  I didn't realize it but this automatically causes the plugins menu 
to include a menu with all the new layout commands. I had thought we could 
add such a menu to LeoSettings.leo but this won't be necessary now. You can 
still use the Layout-Demo outline but it's not necessary any more.
 

With kind regards,

Viktor


Thank you so much for your testing and suggestions!
 

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/8b4fce25-e61a-482d-8a01-77cd51d9ab9fn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to