On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Kent Tenney wrote:
>
>
> To review, we are discussing:
>
> - capability to register a node with an external file, allowing
> editing the file from Leo, adding no sentinels to the external file.
Yes. File:Open will create @edit nodes.
>
> - offer the option of
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Kent Tenney wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what to call it. Maybe @view (as in the plugin) . Maybe
> > @open?? I don't think @slurp will fly :-) Any suggestions?
>
> @edit ?
I like it. Good suggestion.
Edward
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 2:47 PM, schryer wrote:
>
> There are plenty of examples where commercial software fills gaps in
> the market not covered by open source code, but those gaps are
> becoming smaller over time. I believe that programs that the majority
> of computer users require will all b
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26 AM, zpcspm wrote:
>
> On Feb 22, 1:22 pm, "Edward K. Ream" wrote:
> > I see no "forces for unfreedom". Period. Companies have legitimate
> rights,
> > and no amount of extreme left-wing politics changes this fact.
>
> Software companies are being run by businessme
There are plenty of examples where commercial software fills gaps in
the market not covered by open source code, but those gaps are
becoming smaller over time. I believe that programs that the majority
of computer users require will all become public domain high quality
code in the long run -- Le
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> It used to check for 'scroll' variable (judging by comments), but it
> was disabled and now it always does scrolling. I tried calling it with
> scroll=False in afterSelectHint, and returned the old code (I think)
> that actually checks t
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> The implementation is completely obvious and has absolutely no effect
> on existing code, I'll probably push it this evening (have to leave
> now).
I have pushed it now. Introdoces command act-on-node (keyboard
shortcut still unbound).
On Feb 22, 1:22 pm, "Edward K. Ream" wrote:
> I see no "forces for unfreedom". Period. Companies have legitimate rights,
> and no amount of extreme left-wing politics changes this fact.
Software companies are being run by businessmen. Software companies
exist to make profits. They do not creat
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Kent Tenney wrote:
>>
>> I say 'read' because in vim the command ':r(ead) ' will
>> place the content of into the current buffer at the cursor
>> position.
>>
>> and ':e(dit) ' creates a new buffer associa
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Kent Tenney wrote:
>>
>> I say 'read' because in vim the command ':r(ead) ' will
>> place the content of into the current buffer at the cursor
>> position.
>>
>> and ':e(dit) ' creates a new buffer associa
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
> Please do it in the trunk if it has no effect on (compatible with) existing
> code. Otherwise, do it in a separate branch.
The implementation is completely obvious and has absolutely no effect
on existing code, I'll probably push it this
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 6:14 AM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Edward K. Ream
> wrote:
>
> >> I suggest we do create CommandChainDispatcher in g namespace:
> >>
> >> g.act_on_node = CommandChainDispatcher()
> >
> > more likely leoPlugins.CommandChainDispatcher.
>
>
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
>> I suggest we do create CommandChainDispatcher in g namespace:
>>
>> g.act_on_node = CommandChainDispatcher()
>
> more likely leoPlugins.CommandChainDispatcher.
So can I proceed with the idea on trunk, or do you want to do it yourself?
-
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 9:29 PM, rhh wrote:
My apologies for the delay in responding.
> Where and how is the color of a button set?
I suppose it depends on what buttons you are talking about.
The mod_scripting plugin creates all buttons using createIconButton. This,
in turn, calls
self.iconBa
> To have any hope of changing my mind, you would have to explain, precisely,
> how the GPL has, in fact, spurred the development of open software.
>
> To the contrary, I think it is obvious that what is driving open software is
> not some "rebellion" against "forces of unfreedom". Instead, it is
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 5:29 AM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
>
> However, I don't think anything more "advanced" should be added before
> it becomes necessary
I agree, as far as your specific code goes.
However, there already are cases where the 'plugins-loaded' hook would be
useful. To support t
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
> This hints at solutions to several long-standing problems with dispatching
> plugins. It sets a priority, thereby affecting the order in which event
> handlers (aka hooks) are called, and raising g.tryNext allows a handler to
> indicate "
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Seth Johnson wrote:
>
> I said that the GPL serves a purpose, and RMS does as well.
>
On that statement, we shall have to agree to disagree.
>
> On this topic, apparently you lack the ability to think in any other terms
> than some other argument you'd rather dwe
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 5:01 AM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
>
> In addition, we could imaging a two-stage process for loading plugins.
> Stage one is the present process for loading plugins. Stage two would be a
> post-plugin-load pass, which would give all plugins the chance to
> communicate with ea
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
>
> I suggest we do create CommandChainDispatcher in g namespace:
>
> g.act_on_node = CommandChainDispatcher()
more likely leoPlugins.CommandChainDispatcher.
>
> And call g.act_on_node(c,p) on alt+a.
>
> Then you could create your own han
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Edward K. Ream
> wrote:
>
> >> How about a "act-on-node" command?
>
> > Many commands can act on a node, but the idea of designating one of
> > them as the "node action" could open up even more possibili
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Ville M. Vainio wrote:
> (or anthing else) and then runs the command. This is just a trivial
> special of the generic hook.
special CASE...
So how should we proceed?
I suggest we do create CommandChainDispatcher in g namespace:
g.act_on_node = CommandChainDi
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
>> How about a "act-on-node" command?
> Many commands can act on a node, but the idea of designating one of
> them as the "node action" could open up even more possibilities.
>
> Rather than using events (hooks), uA's might be simpler. Plug
23 matches
Mail list logo
