Last call for reviews of PR #3277: improved path functions

[Edward K. Ream]

PR #3277 proposes significant changes to Leo's path-related code.

I have asked Félix and Thomas for reviews, without recent results. Perhaps they are reluctant to comment, which is understandable given the scope of the changes. I'll take full responsibility for any problems that may arise. I am asking only for reviews, of any kind.

Imo, this PR should be merged into devel soon, so we may thoroughly test it before Leo 6.7.3, due next month.

Edward

[Edward K. Ream]

I asked chatGPT to edit this post. Here is the result:

QQQ

Pull Request #3277 proposes significant changes to Leo's path-related code.

I have asked Félix and Thomas for reviews, but I have not received any recent feedback. It's possible that they are hesitant to comment, which is understandable given the scope of the changes. However, I am willing to take full responsibility for any problems that may arise. I am asking for reviews of any kind.

In my opinion, this PR should be merged into devel soon so that we can thoroughly test it before Leo 6.7.3, which is due next month.

QQQ

Maybe not perfect, but chatGPT is a viable alternative to Grammarly, which I used to check the original post. Now let's feed chatGPT back to Grammarly.

Heh. Grammarly scores the chatGPT version as "a bit unclear". In all other respects the scoring is as before: correct, very engaging and "Delivery: just right".

Edward

[Thomas Passin]

I haven't been having any problems.  All my external files I've been working with open and save correctly.  I've been holding off saying anything until I have some more experience with the new code, but so far so good.

I have not tried constructing any new external path expressions as yet.

[Edward K. Ream]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 7:08 AM Thomas Passin <tbp1...@gmail.com> wrote:

I haven't been having any problems.  All my external files I've been working with open and save correctly.  I've been holding off saying anything until I have some more experience with the new code, but so far so good.

I have not tried constructing any new external path expressions as yet.

Thanks for your comments. I'll take that as an approving review, but I'll wait at least one more day.

Edward

[Thomas Passin]

Some of my outlines have an @rst tree like this:

- @path ...

    - @rst .....

        - [the rest of the tree ...]

I wanted to make sure the the @path directive would be honored when the rst3 command and then Sphinx were run.  I just checked this for one outline and it worked as intended.  So that's good, too.

[Edward K. Ream]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 7:21 AM Thomas Passin <tbp1...@gmail.com> wrote:

Some of my outlines have an @rst tree like this:

- @path ...

    - @rst .....

        - [the rest of the tree ...]

I wanted to make sure the the @path directive would be honored when the rst3 command and then Sphinx were run.  I just checked this for one outline and it worked as intended.  So that's good, too.

Thanks for this testing.

Edward

[Félix]

Sorry - I didnt have the time yet: I'll review those changes tonight :)

Félix