On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.comwrote:
I was probably way too boisterous in my edits, trusting the wiki to keep
history and manage dependencies . .
Please do not make such big changes to existing pages as you have done. I'm
going to move your page to an
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.comwrote:
I was probably way too boisterous in my edits, trusting the wiki to keep
history and manage dependencies.
How does one revert a wiki page?
Edward
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
I was probably way too boisterous in my edits, trusting the wiki to keep
history and manage dependencies.
How does one revert a wiki page?
http://leo.zwiki.org/LeoWiki/recentchanges
Click on the time to see the
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Ville M. Vainio vivai...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com
wrote:
I was probably way too boisterous in my edits, trusting the wiki to keep
history and manage dependencies.
How does one revert a wiki
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks. I feel less cranky now.
I spoke too soon. Somehow only 6 recent versions are visible, none what I
want.
It is incredibly annoying to lose work this way. I thought I had saved the
latest to LeoDocs.leo, but
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
If anyone can find a way to revert the page properly I would be grateful.
I did the necessary work by hand. It may be exactly what it was before, but
it is close, and in one case is better than before. So,
**Do not
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
Please do not make such big changes to existing pages as you have done.
I'm going to move your page to an alternative intro page, and restore my
intro.
No need to keep the alternative, it was an experiment with
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
I did the necessary work by hand. It may be exactly what it was before,
but it is close, and in one case is better than before. So,
**Do not change this page significantly without permission!**
My revision mostly
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.comwrote:
I did the necessary work by hand. It may be exactly what it was before,
but it is close, and in one case is better than before. So,
**Do
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:55 PM, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
?? why is it called the 'minibuffer'??
Because that's what it is called in Emacs. I've just updated the top page
to refer to it as an Emacs-like minibuffer. This will be enough for many
readers, and the term minibuffer
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 4:19 PM, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
The last thing you want prospective users to think is 'hey, Leo is
like emacs...'
There is no danger of that, IMO. Take a look at the top page. How much is
similar to Emacs. Only the one word, 'minibuffer'. Furthermore, I
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
To repeat, at the top level we have to be ruthless in presenting the
big-picture narrative without becoming bogged down in details. All
clarifications belong in the children. Some introductory words saying that
An attempt at the page for external files:
External files:
Interpreters, compilers, and text processors/manipulators don't expect
their input to be in the form of outlines, these are all expecting
text files for their input. Leo lets you organize/develope your text
as you go and this is the
Hi Edward
?? why is it called the 'minibuffer'??
I have no problem with mimicking/stealing(*) such a feature from emacs
- I just think that calling it a minibuffer is weird, and loses you
more than it gains. This from a potential Leo *** with 25+ years
experience using many different
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:43 AM, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
'Minibuffer' comes over to me as another new paradigm within Leo that I
need to shift my brain to think about. 'Command area' or similar doesn't.
I'm starting to be convinced. Maybe I'm resisting because 'minibuffer' and
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:35 AM, tfer tfethers...@aol.com wrote:
An attempt at the page for external files:
I think this is an excellent first draft. It's way different from what I
would have written, and that makes is all the more valuable.
I'll put a revised version of this on the wiki
'Minibuffer' comes over to me as another new paradigm within Leo that I
need to shift my brain to think about. 'Command area' or similar doesn't.
I'm starting to be convinced. Maybe I'm resisting because 'minibuffer' and
'minibuffer commands' are entrenched Leo terms now.
Yeah, I
On Feb 20, 3:35 pm, tfer tfethers...@aol.com wrote:
An attempt at the page for external files:
Even in this draft form I found this very helpful - thanks.
Jon N
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
I was probably way too boisterous in my edits, trusting the wiki to keep
history and manage dependencies . .
Um, the upshot is I changed the name of the page . . . oops, sorry. You can
change it back, but I put it here:
http://leo.zwiki.org/LeoStories
Seth
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:41 AM,
The wiki did put the new named page under the Documentation page:
http://leo.zwiki.org/Documentation
Seth
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 2:54 AM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.comwrote:
I was probably way too boisterous in my edits, trusting the wiki to keep
history and manage dependencies .
On Feb 18, 9:41 am, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
The first draft of a new introduction to Leo is at:
The top-level page of the second draft is now ready:
http://leo.zwiki.org/NewIntroductionStoriesAboutLeo
This is easily the most important page of the introduction.
Imo, this is
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:27 PM, tfer tfethers...@aol.com wrote:
Some rewording:
In brief: outlines consist of nodes. Nodes consist of headlines, body
text and optional user data. Headlines appear in Leo's outline pane,
and the selected headline's body text will be in the body pane, user
I'm not sure about this. Let me mull it over awhile...
I'm interested in giving the newbie a mental model that informs them
how Leo works. Here is another attempt at it:
In brief: When we clone a node, we are, metaphorically, providing more
doors to that node so that it can be put in many
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:07 PM, tfer tfethers...@aol.com wrote:
I'm not sure about this. Let me mull it over awhile...
I'm interested in giving the newbie a mental model that informs them
how Leo works. Here is another attempt at it:
In brief: When we clone a node, we are,
On Feb 19, 10:16 pm, Kent Tenney kten...@gmail.com wrote:
Are Leo clones conceptually different than symlinks in Unix?
I believe they are different. If you remove the original file, the
symlink that is pointing to it gets broken. I belive clones are equal,
there is no master clone. You can
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Kent Tenney kten...@gmail.com wrote:
Are Leo clones conceptually different than symlinks in Unix?
Yes, with symlinks you can delete the target file/dir and the symlink
gets broken. They are more like hardlinks (if you could do them a
directory).
--
Ville M.
On Feb 19, 10:16 pm, Kent Tenney kten...@gmail.com wrote:
Are Leo clones conceptually different than symlinks in Unix?
If you delete the original file, you break the symlink. You can delete
a clone without breaking anything.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Ville M. Vainio vivai...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Kent Tenney kten...@gmail.com wrote:
Are Leo clones conceptually different than symlinks in Unix?
Yes, with symlinks you can delete the target file/dir and the symlink
gets broken.
I'm still writing as a 'wannabe-user' of Leo here, and showing my
ignorance, but that's OK ;-/. Something that I was reminded about by
reading the new intro:
?? why is it called the 'minibuffer'??
Is there a 'maxibuffer'? or a 'buffer' somewhere? (apart from the
underlying implementation, of
On Feb 19, 10:55 pm, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
IMO the term 'minibuffer' is ...
... tied to emacs I believe.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
leo-editor group.
To post to this group, send
On Feb 19, 8:58 pm, zpcspm zpc...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 19, 10:55 pm, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
IMO the term 'minibuffer' is ...
... tied to emacs I believe.
Yes, I wondered that from the way the page was written.
I think linking Leo to emacs in this way is A Bad Thing.
The
Another attempt for Clones, (too chatty perhaps):
When a node is cloned, it is like you put a fence around the node and
its sub-outline, (a cyclone fence, te-he). Each time you place a
clone, it is like you added a new gate in the fence to the frontyard.
The path to each gate is the same as the
On Feb 19, 5:19 pm, jkn jkn...@nicorp.f9.co.uk wrote:
That way, new users don't have to know about emacs, and emacs users
can migrate their understanding easily.
Seems like a good idea.
Tom
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are
I have read it and it looks good.
I want to comment on @test nodes.
Quote: For example, in an @test node, a single assert statement can
make up a complete unit test.
Edward, please don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with you
advocating the usage of assert in unit tests. I will explain why
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:06 AM, zpcspm zpc...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to comment on @test nodes.
[snip]
As you can see, the unittest logic dumps explicitly the content of the
variables when tests fail.
In most cases, this is no big deal. Here is an assert that does what you
want:
On Feb 18, 9:41 am, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
The first draft of a new introduction to Leo is at:
http://leo.zwiki.org/NewIntroductionStoriesAboutLeo
The top page will mostly just reference the other pages. These other
pages will include something like
- Leo's window
- Leo
On Feb 18, 11:34 am, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
Suppose we extend the processing that
handles @test and @suite nodes so that in addition to predefining c, g and p
it predefines 'self' as the test case being run. Then you could just do
a = 1 ; b = 2 ; self.assertEqual(a, b)
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:22 PM, zpcspm zpc...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a superb addition
Indeed! From a leo newbie's perspective, @test nodes now look much
more attractive.
Glad to hear it. Thanks for your complaint :-)
Edward
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You
This is a superb addition
Indeed! From a leo newbie's perspective, @test nodes now look much
more attractive.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
leo-editor group.
To post to this group, send email to
39 matches
Mail list logo
