Hi, Many interesting use case from your original perspective. Leo was my main outliner to (de)construct complex text, as a researcher and PhD student. Clones are a killer feature on that front and I still use Leo to read and organize code which has been written by others.
On your particular request maybe you could see the other way around: Emacs inside Leo. I imagined long ago that the body pane is the (console) editor of choice of the user (Vim, Emacs, Nano, Micro) and is embedded there. All shortcuts and expected behavior from this editor work as expected (is just a console), but it is improved by all the meta-organizing capabilities of Leo. This would imply that embedded editors work in collaboration with Leo tree and such approach would imply to make embedded editor and Leo provide services to each other. I don't know if Pyzo explorations and its server architecture give a hint on that front, but now that we are thinking in this "blue space plane" of ideas, that could be an worthy exploration. Cheers, Offray On 25/06/19 2:32 p. m., Jeff R. wrote: > I apologize for my slow response. I do not know whether I am remotely > close to the intended audience for Leo, but I can say that Leo does > not feel far from the type of tool I would use on a regular basis. > > By way of background, I am an attorney and I run a solo law practice. > I use emacs, and particularly orgmode, to track various aspects of my > practice, including scheduling, time tracking, note taking, and brief > drafting. It really does everything I need in those regards, and > importing all of this functionality, or even the bare functionality > that would make me be able to switch from orgmode would be a huge task > and not really what it seems is Leo’s target. > > Outside of the organizing my life aspect of my practice, I am also > constantly working on a book of research on my areas of practice > (constitutional law). My practice area is academic. In this arena, > Leo is superior to orgmode, due mostly to the use of clones. With my > subject area it is impossible to create an outline that does not make > heavy use of clones if it is being efficient. And clones make the > outline so much more clear and easy to work though. But I can’t > justify using a second text editor for this because orgmode is good > enough for this purpose (and can be customized to whatever extent > needed). But there are other things I like about Leo (python over > elisp, for example) that still make me long to be able to make it a > centerpiece of my workflow. > > Beyond orgmode, I find that Emacs is much more inviting to > customization. I know how to do some coding, and have taught myself > python and elisp in the last handfull of years. I do not have the time > to do anything serious, but I write scripts for various tasks that I > routinely use. In emacs, I understand how to easily create commands, > even complex ones, and bind them to shortcuts. I can easily make use > of hooks and insertion and movement commands, manipulate text, and > really do whatever transformations I can imagine (within a text > editor). While I think python is a much more powerful and useful > language, my impression is that Leo does not create such an inviting > environment (in terms of inviting and enabling users to customize the > text editing experience) by comparison. It is very possible that I > simply have not looked deep enough, or know enough about python to > know how to do all of the things elisp brings to the surface (buffer > movement commands, commands like save-excursion, save-restriction, > buffer switching, font-locking, etc.). > > As I said, I also write programs from time to time and think Leo is > much superior to org-babel. > > So, the short answer is that I really need orgmode or a viable > replacement for it, and I recognize that this is well outside of Leo’s > mission, hence my question about Leo inside emacs. > > Thanks for inviting further feedback. > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 2:45:23 PM UTC, Edward K. Ream wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 8:47 AM Arjan <arjan...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > Whilst there is a benefit to the "focus" of seeing only > one node at a time, in the cases where I use Org-mode I > explicitly want/need to see multiple nodes at a time. > > > This is something I would really like to be able to use in > Leo. Both for writing text as well as code, being able to see > the preceding and following node contents would be very > beneficial. > > > #1228 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/1228> > should help considerably. All the changes will be in the code > that draws (redraw) the outline. It should be easy to create a > command that toggles between the legacy outline view and the > "unified" view. > > 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 > <mailto:leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to leo-editor@googlegroups.com > <mailto:leo-editor@googlegroups.com>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/c60fb7b1-8bfe-4cbc-91fe-ab1c6d8c3027%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/c60fb7b1-8bfe-4cbc-91fe-ab1c6d8c3027%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/8cf1006e-96e4-5fd2-983e-aede67e5db69%40riseup.net. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
