On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:51 PM, SegundoBob <segundo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see the appeal of "current time," but making this switch almost certainly > requires losing the benefit of minimizing the node index by only considering > GNX's with the "session start time." Having the gnx reflect the actual creation time of the node should have no effect on the size of gnxs, except to make them slightly smaller, because ni.lastIndex would be zero for most *new* gnxs. > The change of time zone or daylight saving could cause times after the > session start time to equal times in already existing GNX's. Good point. > Or do you want to do a complete scan to determine the minimum unused node > index before every node creation that changes the time stamp? We aren't going to do that. I'm happy sticking with a session timestamp. > New Topic: > > Early in this thread, you seemed concerned, once again, about one GNX being > used in two different files. This should not concern you. It doesn't concern me *provided* that the id parts of two gnxs are equal if and *only* if the same person actually created the two nodes! This is true in the example you give, but it need not be true. In that case, the clashing gnx's *are* going to cause data loss if the paste-retaining-clones command is used. Happily, the case is very rare, as shown by the P1*P2*P3*P4 calculation. > For your benefit and the benefit of Leo-Editor users, you need to make this > clearer in the Leo-Editor documentation. Yup. 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 http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
