Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[Thomas Passin]

It turns out that this clone issue was discussed several years ago and I 
had completely forgotten about it, maybe because I haven't used *@auto-xxx* 
nodes 
or *@presistence* nodes.   See 
https://groups.google.com/g/leo-editor/c/oKGhRhUVTXA/m/xqUHMJzWAQAJ (thank 
you LewisNeal). But perhaps this is not the issue the OP has been 
encountering? 

On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 10:47:19 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:

> The GitHub issue is 3355 
> .
>
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 10:40:25 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>
>> The loss of clones is specific to *@auto-md* trees (although I have not 
>> tested other *@auto-xx* trees):
>>
>> In an outline with both *@clean* and an *@auto-md* trees, when the 
>> outline is closed and re-opened, the clone nodes of the *@clean* tree 
>> remained but the clone nodes of the *@auto-md* tree were no longer 
>> clones.
>>
>> I don't know what the original intention was with respect to *@auto-md 
>> *trees, 
>> but this seems like a serious bug to me.  I'll create an issue for it.
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 10:10:34 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>>
>>> I see where the problem is - or at least *a* problem - is, and it's 
>>> serious. The problem I see is that when an outline with clones is 
>>> re-opened, the clones are no longer clones.  This did not happen when I 
>>> created some clones in my Workbook, so there are some conditions yet to be 
>>> determined. I'll experiment some more to try to pin it down.  The outline 
>>> which showed the problem had both an *@auto-md* and an *@clean* tree.  
>>> I'll try outlines with them separately and report back.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:22:58 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>>>
 @Edward recently re-worked some of the importers.  If you can use the 
 current version of the devel branch (in GitHub) it would be worth trying.  
 Can you share a tree that suffers from the problem?  Or a minimal version 
 that does?

 On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 5:12:30 AM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:

> Sorry, it's Leo 6.6.4 on Arch Linux.
>
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:17:44 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I tried out what you wrote and didn't get an error with an *@auto-md* 
>> file.  It is only a tiny, simple file so maybe it's not enough of a 
>> test.  
>> Here is what I did:
>>
>> 1. Created an @auto-md file with the following structure:
>>
>> @clean c:\temp\leo\md-test-at-auto-md.md
>> Markdown Test Tree
>> A1
>> A1.1
>> A1.1.1
>> A2
>>
>> 2. I added a line *@others *to the top of the body of the top node.  
>> I wrote a line or two for most of the nodes.  Then I saved the outline.
>> 3. I added a new top-level node outside the *@auto-md* node.  I 
>> cloned node *A1* into it.
>> 4. In the cloned *A1.1* node, I added a new line.
>> 5. I observed in an external editor that the *@auto-md* file had the 
>> intended change.
>> 6. I closed and reopened the outline.
>> 7.  I did not see any corruption in the outline.
>>
>> Could you write more detail about the *@auto-md* file that ended up 
>> with a corrupted outline, and whether you use an *@others* line in 
>> it?  And is this the only such file that caused a problem?  And also the 
>> version of Leo and the OS (though it doesn't seem likely that the OS is 
>> playing a part).
>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried 
>>> them with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I 
>>> don't 
>>> think  that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although 
>>> you 
>>> will need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the 
>>> top node.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 An example:

 @auto-md file1.md
 clone-node_1
 clone-node_2

 @auto-md file2.md
 clone-node_1
 clone-node_2

 Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when 
 reading the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. 
 The 
 content remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and 
 whose 
 heading consists of parts of the content.

 I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I 
 see that right? And can I force this somehow?

 Best regards
 Paul
>>>
>>>

-- 
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+uns

Re: Impressive ChatGPT responses

[Thomas Passin]

This is an interesting account of someone doing real programming - 
refactoring and simplifying version 1 - with the help of not one but two 
LLM bots.  He wanted to compare how the two differed and how useful each 
would be - When the rubber duck talks back 
. 
It's especially interesting that - if you are using VSCode, anyway - the 
bot can index your entire repo and use that to give much better results.
On Thursday, May 18, 2023 at 5:42:27 PM UTC-4 Edward K. Ream wrote:

> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 1:38 PM Thomas Passin  wrote:
>
>> And here is the earlier transcript, reformated - the chatbot's doing a 
>> lot of hand-waving!
>
>
> Imo, the response is drivel.
>
> 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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/aedbe41c-1af3-4bbd-b22e-c0e02712fc3an%40googlegroups.com.

Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[Thomas Passin]

The GitHub issue is 3355 
.

On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 10:40:25 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:

> The loss of clones is specific to *@auto-md* trees (although I have not 
> tested other *@auto-xx* trees):
>
> In an outline with both *@clean* and an *@auto-md* trees, when the 
> outline is closed and re-opened, the clone nodes of the *@clean* tree 
> remained but the clone nodes of the *@auto-md* tree were no longer clones.
>
> I don't know what the original intention was with respect to *@auto-md 
> *trees, 
> but this seems like a serious bug to me.  I'll create an issue for it.
>
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 10:10:34 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>
>> I see where the problem is - or at least *a* problem - is, and it's 
>> serious. The problem I see is that when an outline with clones is 
>> re-opened, the clones are no longer clones.  This did not happen when I 
>> created some clones in my Workbook, so there are some conditions yet to be 
>> determined. I'll experiment some more to try to pin it down.  The outline 
>> which showed the problem had both an *@auto-md* and an *@clean* tree.  
>> I'll try outlines with them separately and report back.
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:22:58 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>>
>>> @Edward recently re-worked some of the importers.  If you can use the 
>>> current version of the devel branch (in GitHub) it would be worth trying.  
>>> Can you share a tree that suffers from the problem?  Or a minimal version 
>>> that does?
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 5:12:30 AM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>>>
 Sorry, it's Leo 6.6.4 on Arch Linux.

 On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:17:44 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:

> I tried out what you wrote and didn't get an error with an *@auto-md* 
> file.  It is only a tiny, simple file so maybe it's not enough of a test. 
>  
> Here is what I did:
>
> 1. Created an @auto-md file with the following structure:
>
> @clean c:\temp\leo\md-test-at-auto-md.md
> Markdown Test Tree
> A1
> A1.1
> A1.1.1
> A2
>
> 2. I added a line *@others *to the top of the body of the top node.  
> I wrote a line or two for most of the nodes.  Then I saved the outline.
> 3. I added a new top-level node outside the *@auto-md* node.  I 
> cloned node *A1* into it.
> 4. In the cloned *A1.1* node, I added a new line.
> 5. I observed in an external editor that the *@auto-md* file had the 
> intended change.
> 6. I closed and reopened the outline.
> 7.  I did not see any corruption in the outline.
>
> Could you write more detail about the *@auto-md* file that ended up 
> with a corrupted outline, and whether you use an *@others* line in 
> it?  And is this the only such file that caused a problem?  And also the 
> version of Leo and the OS (though it doesn't seem likely that the OS is 
> playing a part).
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>
>> Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried 
>> them with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I don't 
>> think  that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although 
>> you 
>> will need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the top 
>> node.
>>
>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>>
>>> An example:
>>>
>>> @auto-md file1.md
>>> clone-node_1
>>> clone-node_2
>>>
>>> @auto-md file2.md
>>> clone-node_1
>>> clone-node_2
>>>
>>> Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when 
>>> reading the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. 
>>> The 
>>> content remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and 
>>> whose 
>>> heading consists of parts of the content.
>>>
>>> I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I 
>>> see that right? And can I force this somehow?
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Paul
>>
>>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/96a733f2-a3e7-4321-9390-4d9e12b314c6n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[Thomas Passin]

The loss of clones is specific to *@auto-md* trees (although I have not 
tested other *@auto-xx* trees):

In an outline with both *@clean* and an *@auto-md* trees, when the outline 
is closed and re-opened, the clone nodes of the *@clean* tree remained but 
the clone nodes of the *@auto-md* tree were no longer clones.

I don't know what the original intention was with respect to *@auto-md *trees, 
but this seems like a serious bug to me.  I'll create an issue for it.

On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 10:10:34 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:

> I see where the problem is - or at least *a* problem - is, and it's 
> serious. The problem I see is that when an outline with clones is 
> re-opened, the clones are no longer clones.  This did not happen when I 
> created some clones in my Workbook, so there are some conditions yet to be 
> determined. I'll experiment some more to try to pin it down.  The outline 
> which showed the problem had both an *@auto-md* and an *@clean* tree.  
> I'll try outlines with them separately and report back.
>
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:22:58 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>
>> @Edward recently re-worked some of the importers.  If you can use the 
>> current version of the devel branch (in GitHub) it would be worth trying.  
>> Can you share a tree that suffers from the problem?  Or a minimal version 
>> that does?
>>
>> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 5:12:30 AM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, it's Leo 6.6.4 on Arch Linux.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:17:44 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
 I tried out what you wrote and didn't get an error with an *@auto-md* 
 file.  It is only a tiny, simple file so maybe it's not enough of a test.  
 Here is what I did:

 1. Created an @auto-md file with the following structure:

 @clean c:\temp\leo\md-test-at-auto-md.md
 Markdown Test Tree
 A1
 A1.1
 A1.1.1
 A2

 2. I added a line *@others *to the top of the body of the top node.  I 
 wrote a line or two for most of the nodes.  Then I saved the outline.
 3. I added a new top-level node outside the *@auto-md* node.  I cloned 
 node *A1* into it.
 4. In the cloned *A1.1* node, I added a new line.
 5. I observed in an external editor that the *@auto-md* file had the 
 intended change.
 6. I closed and reopened the outline.
 7.  I did not see any corruption in the outline.

 Could you write more detail about the *@auto-md* file that ended up 
 with a corrupted outline, and whether you use an *@others* line in 
 it?  And is this the only such file that caused a problem?  And also the 
 version of Leo and the OS (though it doesn't seem likely that the OS is 
 playing a part).
 On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:

> Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried 
> them with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I don't 
> think  that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although 
> you 
> will need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the top 
> node.
>
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>
>> An example:
>>
>> @auto-md file1.md
>> clone-node_1
>> clone-node_2
>>
>> @auto-md file2.md
>> clone-node_1
>> clone-node_2
>>
>> Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when 
>> reading the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. 
>> The 
>> content remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and 
>> whose 
>> heading consists of parts of the content.
>>
>> I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I 
>> see that right? And can I force this somehow?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Paul
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/f9525689-5978-4ca0-afee-559d8c9a8c63n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[Thomas Passin]

I see where the problem is - or at least *a* problem - is, and it's 
serious. The problem I see is that when an outline with clones is 
re-opened, the clones are no longer clones.  This did not happen when I 
created some clones in my Workbook, so there are some conditions yet to be 
determined. I'll experiment some more to try to pin it down.  The outline 
which showed the problem had both an *@auto-md* and an *@clean* tree.  I'll 
try outlines with them separately and report back.

On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 8:22:58 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:

> @Edward recently re-worked some of the importers.  If you can use the 
> current version of the devel branch (in GitHub) it would be worth trying.  
> Can you share a tree that suffers from the problem?  Or a minimal version 
> that does?
>
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 5:12:30 AM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>
>> Sorry, it's Leo 6.6.4 on Arch Linux.
>>
>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:17:44 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> I tried out what you wrote and didn't get an error with an *@auto-md* 
>>> file.  It is only a tiny, simple file so maybe it's not enough of a test.  
>>> Here is what I did:
>>>
>>> 1. Created an @auto-md file with the following structure:
>>>
>>> @clean c:\temp\leo\md-test-at-auto-md.md
>>> Markdown Test Tree
>>> A1
>>> A1.1
>>> A1.1.1
>>> A2
>>>
>>> 2. I added a line *@others *to the top of the body of the top node.  I 
>>> wrote a line or two for most of the nodes.  Then I saved the outline.
>>> 3. I added a new top-level node outside the *@auto-md* node.  I cloned 
>>> node *A1* into it.
>>> 4. In the cloned *A1.1* node, I added a new line.
>>> 5. I observed in an external editor that the *@auto-md* file had the 
>>> intended change.
>>> 6. I closed and reopened the outline.
>>> 7.  I did not see any corruption in the outline.
>>>
>>> Could you write more detail about the *@auto-md* file that ended up 
>>> with a corrupted outline, and whether you use an *@others* line in it?  
>>> And is this the only such file that caused a problem?  And also the version 
>>> of Leo and the OS (though it doesn't seem likely that the OS is playing a 
>>> part).
>>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>>>
 Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried them 
 with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I don't think  
 that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although you will 
 need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the top node.

 On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:

> An example:
>
> @auto-md file1.md
> clone-node_1
> clone-node_2
>
> @auto-md file2.md
> clone-node_1
> clone-node_2
>
> Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when 
> reading the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. The 
> content remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and whose 
> heading consists of parts of the content.
>
> I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I see 
> that right? And can I force this somehow?
>
> Best regards
> Paul



-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/f9c0ac81-a08e-47a8-bc60-e5d359ab1cdbn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[Thomas Passin]

@Edward recently re-worked some of the importers.  If you can use the 
current version of the devel branch (in GitHub) it would be worth trying.  
Can you share a tree that suffers from the problem?  Or a minimal version 
that does?

On Wednesday, May 24, 2023 at 5:12:30 AM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:

> Sorry, it's Leo 6.6.4 on Arch Linux.
>
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:17:44 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I tried out what you wrote and didn't get an error with an *@auto-md* 
>> file.  It is only a tiny, simple file so maybe it's not enough of a test.  
>> Here is what I did:
>>
>> 1. Created an @auto-md file with the following structure:
>>
>> @clean c:\temp\leo\md-test-at-auto-md.md
>> Markdown Test Tree
>> A1
>> A1.1
>> A1.1.1
>> A2
>>
>> 2. I added a line *@others *to the top of the body of the top node.  I 
>> wrote a line or two for most of the nodes.  Then I saved the outline.
>> 3. I added a new top-level node outside the *@auto-md* node.  I cloned 
>> node *A1* into it.
>> 4. In the cloned *A1.1* node, I added a new line.
>> 5. I observed in an external editor that the *@auto-md* file had the 
>> intended change.
>> 6. I closed and reopened the outline.
>> 7.  I did not see any corruption in the outline.
>>
>> Could you write more detail about the *@auto-md* file that ended up with 
>> a corrupted outline, and whether you use an *@others* line in it?  And 
>> is this the only such file that caused a problem?  And also the version of 
>> Leo and the OS (though it doesn't seem likely that the OS is playing a 
>> part).
>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried them 
>>> with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I don't think  
>>> that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although you will 
>>> need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the top node.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>>>
 An example:

 @auto-md file1.md
 clone-node_1
 clone-node_2

 @auto-md file2.md
 clone-node_1
 clone-node_2

 Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when 
 reading the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. The 
 content remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and whose 
 heading consists of parts of the content.

 I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I see 
 that right? And can I force this somehow?

 Best regards
 Paul
>>>
>>>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/90b10d4a-38d7-4679-8365-aeba2ea87c84n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[p.os...@datec.at]

Sorry, it's Leo 6.6.4 on Arch Linux.

On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 8:17:44 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:

> I tried out what you wrote and didn't get an error with an *@auto-md* 
> file.  It is only a tiny, simple file so maybe it's not enough of a test.  
> Here is what I did:
>
> 1. Created an @auto-md file with the following structure:
>
> @clean c:\temp\leo\md-test-at-auto-md.md
> Markdown Test Tree
> A1
> A1.1
> A1.1.1
> A2
>
> 2. I added a line *@others *to the top of the body of the top node.  I 
> wrote a line or two for most of the nodes.  Then I saved the outline.
> 3. I added a new top-level node outside the *@auto-md* node.  I cloned 
> node *A1* into it.
> 4. In the cloned *A1.1* node, I added a new line.
> 5. I observed in an external editor that the *@auto-md* file had the 
> intended change.
> 6. I closed and reopened the outline.
> 7.  I did not see any corruption in the outline.
>
> Could you write more detail about the *@auto-md* file that ended up with 
> a corrupted outline, and whether you use an *@others* line in it?  And is 
> this the only such file that caused a problem?  And also the version of Leo 
> and the OS (though it doesn't seem likely that the OS is playing a part).
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote:
>
>> Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried them 
>> with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I don't think  
>> that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although you will 
>> need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the top node.
>>
>> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>>
>>> An example:
>>>
>>> @auto-md file1.md
>>> clone-node_1
>>> clone-node_2
>>>
>>> @auto-md file2.md
>>> clone-node_1
>>> clone-node_2
>>>
>>> Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when 
>>> reading the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. The 
>>> content remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and whose 
>>> heading consists of parts of the content.
>>>
>>> I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I see 
>>> that right? And can I force this somehow?
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Paul
>>
>>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/580f007c-63e5-474d-a46c-2c7c336317bdn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: @auto-ms does not get along with Leo's clones

[p.os...@datec.at]

@clean (and @file likely so) is not an option, because then the tree of 
nodes is note converted into markdown sections with the respective headings 
and their level.

On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 7:58:13 PM UTC+2 tbp1...@gmail.com wrote:

> Maybe @clean or even @file would work for you (not that I've tried them 
> with clones, which I'll try out soon) instead of @auto-md.  I don't think  
> that @auto-md really gets you anything that they don't, although you will 
> need to put *@language md* at  the start of the body of the top node.
>
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2023 at 12:51:48 PM UTC-4 p.os...@datec.at wrote:
>
>> An example:
>>
>> @auto-md file1.md
>> clone-node_1
>> clone-node_2
>>
>> @auto-md file2.md
>> clone-node_1
>> clone-node_2
>>
>> Changes in a clone causes (don't know exactly when, probably when reading 
>> the LEO file) that the tree hierarchy is partially destroyed. The content 
>> remains, but ends up in a node that didn't exist before and whose heading 
>> consists of parts of the content.
>>
>> I think this could be prevented if @auto-md would only write. Do I see 
>> that right? And can I force this somehow?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Paul
>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/21d92cd3-8c24-4514-90be-72839007c6b0n%40googlegroups.com.