(one) place. You're doing something wrong if you're creating external
code files that are designed to have many places update with the same
actual textual code, which you are aiming at changing in one location
and having multiple places in the external files update textually and
redundantly
Seems more like templating to me -- maybe one instance would be an
@file branch, but (in my concept) other instances would be under
@template nodes, even if they're the same file in terms of content.
Seth
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Matt Wilkie map...@gmail.com wrote:
(one) place. You're
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 4:18:56 AM UTC+7, Matt Wilkie wrote:
but I really don't see any other way of doing it.
My SOP as workaround solution would be to:
- Keep the code for your batch in a sub that can get cloned, don't clone
the @ file node directly.
- In the location that
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:11 AM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:46:21 AM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
My second concern is with what I believe to be an unnecessarily strict
blanket rule
keeping clones out of @file branches
When the master source file is
On Monday, January 23, 2012 3:25:21 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
To me, the main topic - preventing data loss due to multi-file clones.
:-) I'm developing the original topic -- why Edward likes clones.
This I don't get. I haven't said anything about safety enforcement,
first. If
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 9:33 AM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, January 23, 2012 3:25:21 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
To me, the main topic - preventing data loss due to multi-file clones.
:-) I'm developing the original topic -- why Edward likes clones.
This I don't get. I
On Monday, January 23, 2012 11:08:32 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
It seems to me that you're emulating what I'm recommending, only I have a
functional definition of the single clone @file -- it's for one unitary
external file, not any hybrid external file. If the distinction in
functions
On Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:46:21 AM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
My second concern is with what I believe to be an unnecessarily strict
blanket rule
keeping clones out of @file branches
When the master source file is externally modified, my use case
specifically requires one (and
If so, is it acceptable to substitute any but the last rather than
first, to handle the case where there needs to be more than one importing
@file branch (keeping to the rule that any given node is only in one of
them).
You can do anything that works :-) Keep in mind that what is
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 4:49 PM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:32:48 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
I'm simply questioning whether the idea/discussion of templating
should necessarily be confabulated with reducing inadvertent data-loss due
to
clone-war
Although much of this thread is above my pay grade, I hope to be able to
contribute productively since several of my use cases for Leo have caused
cross-file cloning problems. I hope those more knowledgeable than I will
feel free to jump in an correct any mistakes below, and do please excuse
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:14:52 AM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
The generating content thing is in tension with the fact Leo is a tool
for working with external files for a particular kind of purpose: editing
code, which is linear and of a nature where things have their (one) place.
You're
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 5:57:02 AM UTC+7, Terry wrote:
But it seems like others are trying to use them to generate output with
repetitive elements, presumably because they're unaware of more appropriate
tools for doing that, and Leo's clones seem to offer a solution to their
problem.
On
My point is to distinguish the templating function that's currently
accomplished with cross-file clones -- clones within @file branches
-- from the code maintenance function. I recommend doing that by
keeping clones out of @file branches, and adding @template branches
where clones can be put.
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not clear about just how generally the term templating applies to all
non-coding use cases.
From my experience with HTML, it would refer to the repetitive site chrome
elements wrapping around the variable content.
However
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:50:30 AM UTC+7, Terry wrote:
Maybe there's no way to stop people shooting themselves in the foot
with a tool as complex and versatile as Leo - I just think that with
clones they sometimes
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:50:30 AM UTC+7, Terry wrote:
Maybe there's no way to stop people shooting themselves in the foot
with a tool as
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 6:37:49 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
My point is to distinguish the templating function that's currently
accomplished with cross-file clones -- clones within @file branches --
from the code maintenance function.
I appreciate your attempting to clarify the
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it correct to say that you'll have no problems if you use the Leo
app and just freely and unthinkingly use clones in one Leo file? No
cross-file clones?
Assuming you mean, no clones in @file nodes, the answer
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
You can group clones without regard for what external files they're
in, willy-nilly, so long as what you're doing is creating views into a
codebase, wherein files are maintained independently, and never making
one a
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:48 AM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 6:37:49 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
My point is to distinguish the templating function that's currently
accomplished with cross-file clones -- clones within @file branches --
from the code
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com
wrote:
Is it correct to say that you'll have no problems if you use the Leo
app and just freely and unthinkingly use clones in one Leo file? No
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com
wrote:
You can group clones without regard for what external files they're
in, willy-nilly, so long as what you're doing is creating views into a
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:32:48 PM UTC+7, Differance wrote:
I gave another example use case - does
that fit within the domain of templating AFAYC?
Yes. I explained that the encyclopedia's volumes would be templated.
But there certainly can be all sorts of other things Leo is used
On Thursday, January 19, 2012 9:49:21 PM UTC+7, Edward K. Ream wrote:
Almost. The pattern in leoPy.leo is safe: all views reside either in
leoProjects.txt, the *first* @file node in the outline, or in the
outline itself.
This will be safe, because if you modify any node in an external
There are two fundamental reason why I like clones. For these reasons
Leo's clones are here to stay:
1. Unlike any conceivable kind of linking, clones allow me to gather
information together that I can browse *without* jumping around the
outline. The pattern is:
+ A view node (typically
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:47:57 -0800 (PST)
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Unlike any conceivable kind of linking, clones allow me to gather
information together that I can browse *without* jumping around the
outline.
This use of clones is very cool, *if* you're comfortable
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:47:57 -0800 (PST)
Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Unlike any conceivable kind of linking, clones allow me to gather
information together that I can browse *without* jumping around
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
The generating content thing is in tension with the fact Leo is a tool
for working with external files for a particular kind of purpose:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:14:52 -0500
Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it correct to say that you'll have no problems if you use the Leo
app and just freely and unthinkingly use clones in one Leo file? No
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
But my point is that the concept of templating is fundamentally at
odds with maintaining a codebase. Therefore, if I'm getting what you
mean by cross-file clones, cross-file clones shouldn't automatically
do
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:00:32 -0500
Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
First, I think you answered the question: no. But I'm still unclear
what a cross-file clone is. Is it a clone that's in the one leo file,
pointing at external file A, while within the @file branch for
external
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com wrote:
irritating minor clarification below
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Seth Johnson seth.p.john...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
I was going to say
33 matches
Mail list logo
