More reasons why Leo won't emulate pyzo

[Edward K. Ream]

It's important to complete the pyzo project as much as possible. As part of this process, this post lists more reasons why I have no intention of ever integrating pyzo into Leo.

- It's dead easy to switch back and forth between pyzo and Leo.

- I personally would not use pyzo's shell.

- Pyzo's shell isn't a great match for Leo's script composition features.  The distinction between interactive and script mode pretty much doesn't exit in Leo.

- Leo's plugins can already do almost everything pyzo does. Sure, they might be improved, maybe using actual pyzo code.  But this is hardly a high priority item.

- The pyzo_support plugin does a lot of heavy lifting.  Feel free to experiment with it, if you think the work is worth your time.

Summary

If you want pyzoic features, use pyzo. You can access Leo outlines from pyzo using Leo's bridge.

Leo can always be improved, perhaps using pyzo's ideas, or even code.  But that's very different from "importing" pyzo's shell architecture.  It's just not worth doing.

More work on this pyzo integration is not worth my time. It's time for new directions.

Edward

[Edward K. Ream]

On Tuesday, June 18, 2019 at 1:49:24 PM UTC-5, Edward K. Ream wrote:

It's important to complete the pyzo project as much as possible. As part of this process, this post lists more reasons why I have no intention of ever integrating pyzo into Leo.

Against all these (valid) reasons, there are the seductive images of cool pyzo docks. The recent Ahas tell me to ignore these siren songs.

Leo and pyzo have their own strengths and very different world views. I encourage Leonistas to use pyzo when appropriate.

Edward