Re: Why nits matter

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:52 AM, Edward K. Ream  wrote:

​> ​
I have just created #721
. It will add support
for @bool select-next-after-delete setting, with a default that will retain
legacy operation.

​> ​
As I write this, it seems that it would be foolish to do this for 5.7
final, but it might sneak in.

This item definitely *will not* be included in 5.7.  The code changes
involving undo are *way* too complex to include at the last minute.

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.

Please hold all commits to master until 5.7 final

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
Expect 5.7 final on Friday.  I'll be working on documentation and 
distribution issues until then.

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.

Re: Why nits matter

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Chris George  wrote:

I have a nit. :-)
>
> When deleting nodes in the tree, after hitting delete the selection moves
> up the tree. When deleting multiple children, this is unintuitive. It would
> be better for the selection to move down to the next child.
>

​This is an enhancement, not a nit. I have just created #721
. It will add support
for @bool select-next-after-delete setting, with a default that will retain
legacy operation.

Work is in progress, but this is far from a trivial task. The new setting
affects undo, redo, delete node, and cut node commands, as well as unit
tests.

As I write this, it seems that it would be foolish to do this for 5.7
final, but it might sneak in. In any case, you'll get this soon.

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.

Re: 1d3e6bc: The CompareLeoOutlines class for comparing .leo files

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:03 PM, lewis  wrote:

Please don't delay for me, I'm tied up with work.
>

​Rev e172a45 adds the diff-and-open-leo-files command.

The diff_leo_files_helper function does all the work for this command and
the diff-leo-files commands.

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.

Re: OTish: asm.js - an extraordinarily optimizable, low-level subset of JavaScript

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 7:27 AM, jkn  wrote:

> Just for general interest and 'wow'-ness really, given the recent chat
> about Node.js, browser integration, ect. ect.
>
> http://asmjs.org/
>
> http://kripken.github.io/mloc_emscripten_talk/
>

​Thanks for the links.  Given the complications involved I would not have
paid any attention to this kind of project unless it came from an
organization like Mozilla.

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.

Re: OTish: asm.js - an extraordinarily optimizable, low-level subset of JavaScript

2018-02-14 Thread Jacob MacDonald 
That's not all. If you want to see some really neat things check out Web
Assembly, the evolution of ASM.js which compiles to a binary and already
has support in a few browsers and LLVM.

Jacob.

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018, 08:22 Edward K. Ream  wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 7:27 AM, jkn  wrote:
>
>> Just for general interest and 'wow'-ness really, given the recent chat
>> about Node.js, browser integration, ect. ect.
>>
>> http://asmjs.org/
>>
>> http://kripken.github.io/mloc_emscripten_talk/
>>
>
> ​Thanks for the links.  Given the complications involved I would not have
> paid any attention to this kind of project unless it came from an
> organization like Mozilla.
>
> 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.
>

-- 
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.

Leo 5.7 is code complete. Please test

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
I plan no further programming work before Leo 5.7 final.

Naturally, I'll fix any newly reported serious bugs.

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.

Re: OTish: asm.js - an extraordinarily optimizable, low-level subset of JavaScript

2018-02-14 Thread PMario 
Hi,

Just got this link today: https://webassembly.studio/ ... if you want to 
play with C or Rust -> WebAssembly :)

-m

-- 
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.

Re: (Newbie?) question about js syntax in store/index.js

2018-02-14 Thread Terry Brown 
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:12:10 -0800 (PST)
"Edward K. Ream"  wrote:

> These look kinda like function definitions without "function" or "=>".

New to me, but they do seem to be function definitions without function
or =>

Typing in the Chrome console:

a = { TEST (x) { return(x+2) } }
a.TEST(2)
4

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Functions/Method_definitions

suggests they're properties, to the degree those are different from
functions.

Cheers -Terry

-- 
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.

(Newbie?) question about js syntax in store/index.js

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
I have begun studying LeoVue.  I have run across mystifying javascript 
syntax that googling does not resolve.  Any explanation would be welcome.

leovue/src/store/index.js contains the Vue store 
. For study I have refactored this as 
follows:

// = The Store ===
export default new Vuex.Store({
  state: {
<< state >>
  },
  mutations: {
<< mutations >>
  },
  actions: {
<< actions >>
  }
})

The state object is simply as set of key/value pairs, as expected.  But the 
mutations and actions sections do not seem to be key/value pairs. They look 
more like lists enclosed {}. The first two entries in the actions (object?) 
are:

ADDDATASET (state, o) {
  state.dataSets[o.k] = o.v
},
ADDDATATABLE (state, o) {
  state.dataTables[o.k] = o.v
},

These look kinda like function definitions without "function" or "=>". But 
various descriptions of so-called object initializers don't seem to explain 
this syntax.

As another example, this appears near the start the page What is Vuex? 
 :

new Vue({
  // state
  data () {
return {
  count: 0
}
  },
  // view
  template: `
{{ count }}
  `,
  // actions
  methods: {
increment () {
  this.count++
}
  }
})

Again,  I assume that the first '{' starts an object. The template: key 
contains a string object.  But huh?, the data and increment (functions?) do 
not seem to be key/value pairs.  Are these functions *evaluated* when 
creating the object, to yield a key/value pair? 

Can anyone explain what's going on? Where is the reference?

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.

Re: (Newbie?) question about js syntax in store/index.js

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Terry Brown  wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:12:10 -0800 (PST)
> "Edward K. Ream"  wrote:
>
> > These look kinda like function definitions without "function" or "=>".
>
> New to me, but they do seem to be function definitions without function
> or =>
>
> Typing in the Chrome console:
>
> a = { TEST (x) { return(x+2) } }
> a.TEST(2)
> 4
>
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/
> Reference/Functions/Method_definitions
>
> suggests they're properties, to the degree those are different from
> functions.
>

​Thanks, Terry.  This should get me started.

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.

Re: (Newbie?) question about js syntax in store/index.js

2018-02-14 Thread Edward K. Ream 
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 5:03 PM, Edward K. Ream  wrote:

>
>
>
>> Typing in the Chrome console:
>>
>> a =
>> ​​
>> { TEST (x) { return(x+2) } }
>> a.TEST(2)
>> 4
>>
>
​So these two lines are equivalent:

​
{ TEST (x) { return(x+2) } }
​
{ TEST: function (x) { return(x+2) } }

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.

Re: (Newbie?) question about js syntax in store/index.js

2018-02-14 Thread Terry Brown 
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:26:10 -0600
"Edward K. Ream"  wrote:

> ​So these two lines are equivalent:
> 
> ​
> { TEST (x) { return(x+2) } }
> ​
> { TEST: function (x) { return(x+2) } }
> 
> Edward

http://www.benmvp.com/learning-es6-enhanced-object-literals/

explains a bit more explicitly.  But yes.

Cheers -Terry

-- 
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.