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
I just tried to modify a layout with free_layout, then renamed
the .leo file, and the configuration was gone. Renaming back to the
old name restored the configuration. I deduce from this, that the
layout is not stored inside the leo file, but elsewhere. That means
however, that I cannot give the
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 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:19:18 -0800 (PST)
Josef joe...@gmx.net wrote:
I just tried to modify a layout with free_layout, then renamed
the .leo file, and the configuration was gone. Renaming back to the
old name restored the configuration. I deduce from this, that the
layout is not stored inside
v 4.9-441
Please see: http://i.imgur.com/GXM2x.jpg
I'm trying to change node body font (to monospaced_ and font size and
it does not seem to be working.
1) What could be the reason ?
2) The full font name is this popular programmer font Envy Code R -
do I have the name right in the setting ?
On Jan 18, 1:40 pm, Edward K. Ream edream...@gmail.com wrote:
The bug 879331: Redefining a key binding breaks menu items with same
binding is easily the most complex bug I've ever tried to fix.
Happily, this may not be so. I have uncovered some suspicious code in
config.getShortcut: it
OK I found the fine print : For the Qt gui the settings are in the
node @data qt-gui-plugin-style-sheet.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
leo-editor group.
To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Terry Brown terry_n_br...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:19:18 -0800 (PST)
Josef joe...@gmx.net wrote:
I just tried to modify a layout with free_layout, then renamed
the .leo file, and the configuration was gone. Renaming back to the
old name
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Kent Tenney kten...@gmail.com wrote:
I like the convenience for duplicating a layout, copy and paste the
definition node, save and refresh from disk ...
I agree. This is a nice instance of GvR's principle: explicit is
better than impliciti.
Edward
--
You
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
This is highly off-topic for most on the list, so feel free to ignore, but
anyone using Leo for single-source documentation generation/conversion,
including future googlers, please reply with comments or notes on your
experiences.
I have been advocating the idea of pushing Leo-derived content
23 matches
Mail list logo
