On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 05:33:15 -0500 "Edward K. Ream" <edream...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:21 AM, vitalije <vitali...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > What would be the benefits if Leo configuration code use database to > > store and retrieve settings[?] > > An interesting question. As I understand you, you are, in effect, > suggesting that Leo cache the contents of leoSettings.leo and > myLeoSettings.leo. That has the potential to speed the loading of > Leo significantly. My interpretation of the proposal was a replacement of all @settings trees, not simply caching. I'm not sure how much of Leo's startup time is used processing settings, but I'm guessing it's not enough to warrant additional complexity by adding caching. Sqlite is a standard Python library, so no installation issue. DB's can represent hierarchy, so that could be handled too. I think the code simplification alone would be valuable, any startup time decrease is just an added benefit. But if it's vetoed, it's vetoed. I guess a demo project could demonstrate the possible user interface and API (although post init. API wise I don't think there'd be much to demonstrate, as little would change). 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.
