Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 2:09 PM jkn wrote: > Thomas' list sounds pretty sensible to me at first blush. Nevertheless, I > do wonder whether keeping things in a discussion/proposal phase for a while > would be a good idea, rather than (for instance) jumping onto #3429. > Why wait :) Edward --

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

Thomas' list sounds pretty sensible to me at first blush. Nevertheless, I do wonder whether keeping things in a discussion/proposal phase for a while would be a good idea, rather than (for instance) jumping onto #3429. J^n On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 6:40:33 PM UTC+1 Edward K. Ream

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:09 AM Thomas Passin wrote: I propose that whether a node gets cut or copied, that [snip]. > Many thanks for this great idea. See #3429 . I'll do this asap. Edward -- You received this message because you are

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 11:36:41 AM UTC-4 Edward K. Ream wrote: On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 9:28 AM jkn wrote: > So, "once you have learned about gnx's, Cut- and paste- nodes is lost to you"? Not at all. Only Leo's *devs *need to take care. To repeat: a Leo dev is someone who changes Leo's

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 9:28 AM jkn wrote: > So, "once you have learned about gnx's, Cut- and paste- nodes is lost to you"? Not at all. Only Leo's *devs *need to take care. To repeat: a Leo dev is someone who changes Leo's codebase. And I don't mind if Leo devs change gnxs in their *own

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 8:49 AM Jacob Peck wrote: > Your recent prescriptivism has been a bit frustrating as someone who has > been using Leo for over a decade. > You can do anything you like provided you don't issue a PR. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

So, "once you have learned about gnx's, Cut- and paste- nodes is lost to you"? Sorry, like Jake says, I am trying to be constructive here. But I too think things are moving too fast. Jon N On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 2:49:17 PM UTC+1 Edward K. Ream wrote: > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 8:02 AM

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

I move nodes like this all the time. Additionally, I rarely ever use clones, despite being one of Leo's 'headline features'. Your recent prescriptivism has been a bit frustrating as someone who has been using Leo for over a decade. The joy of Leo is that the user can do things in so many ways.

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 8:02 AM Thomas Passin wrote: > The gnx change may be expected, but as a user if I cut a node and paste > it somewhere else, in my mind it's the *same* node and an "unbreakable" UNL > should take me to that same node afterwards. In my mind there should be no > difference

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 8:28 AM jkn wrote: By 'devs', do you mean, erm ... 'users' ? > I meant anyone who commits code to Leo's code base. The harmful effects of copy-node/paste-node would also apply to *other* devs, that is, anyone who commits code to any *other* code base. Edward -- You

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 8:23 AM Thomas Passin wrote: > Hmm, we have a real disagreement here. I think that cut-paste within an > outline should be equivalent to a move. And anyway, some fundamental > property like node identity should not have to depend on whether someone > happens to remember

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

Hi Edward By 'devs', do you mean, erm ... 'users' ? I agree with Thomas, I think there is a real disagreement here. Has it always been true that "Leo devs should *never* move nodes by copy/paste", or is this a recent ... limitation, or ... evolution of your thinking, or what? Thanks,

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

Hmm, we have a real disagreement here. I think that cut-paste within an outline should be equivalent to a move. And anyway, some fundamental property like node identity should not have to depend on whether someone happens to remember a subtle point - if they even had learned about it - when

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 8:11:56 AM UTC-5 jkn wrote: What are Outline | Cut-Node and Outline | Paste-Node for then? An earlier reply (in this thread) explains that "copy outline" creates an independent copy. Useful for

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 7:45:21 AM UTC-5 Edward K. Ream wrote: Then don't move nodes by cut and paste! I *never* move nodes this way. *Devs should never move a node by cut/paste*!! Doing so destroys the node's gnx. In effect, the dev is claiming that *they *created the node, not the

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 1:45:21 PM UTC+1 Edward K. Ream wrote: On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 11:21 PM Thomas Passin wrote: Trouble is, when you cut a node and paste it, its gnx changes. To prevent that you would have to remember to paste the node as a clone rather than do a simple paste.

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

The gnx change may be expected, but as a user if I cut a node and paste it somewhere else, in my mind it's the *same* node and an "unbreakable" UNL should take me to that same node afterwards. In my mind there should be no difference between moving a node using move commands (like CTRL-D) and

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 7:42 AM Thomas Passin wrote: > Here's what I tried in my workbook: > > 1. Create a node for testing. > 2. Copy its gnx to clipboard using a tiny script. * > 3. Paste that gnx into the node's body for future reference. > 4. Cut the node using the Outline/cut-node item. > 5.

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 11:21 PM Thomas Passin wrote: Trouble is, when you cut a node and paste it, its gnx changes. To prevent > that you would have to remember to paste the node as a clone rather than do > a simple paste. This is asking for trouble. (And it's a weakness of my > zettel-kasten

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

Here's what I tried in my workbook: 1. Create a node for testing. 2. Copy its gnx to clipboard using a tiny script. * 3. Paste that gnx into the node's body for future reference. 4. Cut the node using the Outline/cut-node item. 5. Paste the node somewhere else in the same outline. 6. Copy the

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 6:40 AM Thomas Passin wrote: Maybe a paste of a node should always maintain the gnx unless it would > create a clone. > Hmm. Under what circumstance would a paste-node *not* create a clone? I sometimes use paste-node to create an independent copy of a node (and its

Re: "Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

Maybe a paste of a node should always maintain the gnx unless it would create a clone. On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 12:21:12 AM UTC-4 Thomas Passin wrote: > I think it's not uncommon to cut a node and paste it somewhere else in the > outline. For example, if I want to move a node from near

"Unbreakable UNLs" Can Break Under A Common Scenario

I think it's not uncommon to cut a node and paste it somewhere else in the outline. For example, if I want to move a node from near the top to near the bottom of a long outline, it would be impractical to move it down node by node or to drag it. I simply cut and paste it. Trouble is, when