leo-editor VS deno_std

What are your experiences with literate programming for handover of code?

I am thinking of tools like noweb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noweb), LEO (http://leoeditor.com/) org-mode (http://cachestocaches.com/2018/6/org-literate-programming/), scribble/lp2 (https://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/lp.html#%28part._scribble_lp2_.Language%29),

My experience so far is that it can be a fantastic tool for documenting and handing over complex algorithms to successor developers. I use extensively use ersonal wikis (sometimes MoinMoin, sometimes Zim Wiki, in the last time often a combination of github with reStructuredText) for work. That might also be sufficient when handing over boring code.

I know what folding is, that's just not what I want. I want to completely hide everything that is not related to the current function. For a while, I used http://leoeditor.com/ where I could have every function/method as a node in a tree, with the node body containing just that. Looking for a way to achieve the same in vim if possible.

The lack of good node/graph based APIs for Org Mode is my beef as well. When you compare it with the APIs of the Leo Editor[1], Org pales in comparison. Manipulation that is trivial in the Leo Editor can be quite a pain in Org mode.

[1] https://leoeditor.com/

> What outliners do you know which allow end-users to feed their data into formulas for processing it without using general-purpose programming languages?

Bit of a pointless constraint, the talk is about outliners, not no-code-datamangment. Which tool today does this even offer on a useful level?

But you can look at leo editor (https://leoeditor.com), which is active for 20+ years, fully scriptable and extendable. Though, it's a hot piece of garbage for laymen. It's offers a bunch of features and plugins even for non-coders, but I'm not sure it would satisfy you for this area, if you can't code.

But I'm not sure if there ever is a tool which will satisfy everyone with just a no-code-approach.

Hmm maybe you mean:

- Programming based on fragments, not documents (e.g. LEO https://leoeditor.com/)

- Live programming (e.g. smalltalk environments)

- ... where certain actions are not available, e.g. a PL geared towards speech recognition may not support "hover"

There's also https://leoeditor.com/ where you can have a tree of nodes and execute any of them.

I had this problem until I found an editor that had outlining as it's core design paradigm. Now, with the outline always visible, it's _really_ easy to navigate any length file.

Unfortunately, at one point I got so used to navigating with the outline that I ended up making a 1500 line function in C (I was an even worse C programmer then than I am now). Because of the outline, I could read and follow it easily, but anyone with a different editor was royally screwed :-(

If you're interested, the editor is LEO (http://leoeditor.com/) it's been mentioned on HN a few times

For reference (for the issues you mentioned): 1. This issue was opened almost immediately to solve the weird .only function not working https://github.com/denoland/deno_std/issues/2979 2. That looks weird to me, will get back to you on this one since it should work I think 3. Generally polluting the global namespace isn't great, but because we're only polluting the namespace of a module (and we choose what parts to import), I personally find it quite freeing. I entirely understand how that might feel awkward. 4. you CAN specifying only writing to certain directories! --allow-write=/path/to/dir would allow that!

At least for the ones related to trees, it's just a renaming. Below is a link to the PR. When I initially implemented these trees, I chose the names BSTree and RBTree to keep the names short. I'm guessing the person that proposed renaming them did so to make it more obvious what they are.

https://github.com/denoland/deno_std/pull/2400

The standard library is separate from the runtime. It wouldn't break backward compatibility if you were to update. For example, if you were importing RBTree and upgraded Deno to the latest release, it would keep working just fine. You would only really need to switch to using RedBlackTree instead if there was a change made to it that you wanted.

I think the only time you would need to update your standard module imports to be able to use newer versions of the Deno runtime if the standard module were depending on runtime APIs that have a breaking change.

It is like Demo deprecating fs.exists().[1]

[1]https://github.com/denoland/deno_std/discussions/2102

This was fun to read through.

I would need to profile the code, but the startup time being bad for Deno seems like maybe a combination of the code in here being unoptimized:

https://github.com/denoland/deno_std/blob/0ce558fec1a1beeda3...

(Ex. Lots of temporaries)

And usage of the readFileSync+TextDecoder API instead of readTextFile (which is also a docs issue since it's suggests the first one). It seems the code loads the 100MB into memory, then converts to another 100MB of utf8, then parses with that inefficient csv decoder. The rust and go versions look to be doing stream/incremental processing instead.

But it there's some talk to reconsider it

Sorry to hear that. I want to provide expect API in deno_std in the future: https://github.com/denoland/deno_std/issues/1779

I just migrated the module to Deno and rewrote the test cases using the Deno test runner. Also contributed a bug fix to the test runner that I encountered during the migration. An npm version is still available and automatically generated from the Deno code via a small bash script (rewriting imports, adding an index.ts, etc.).

Much of Node.js is written in C, yet it's still called Node.js.

Deno has some JavaScript/TypeScript in it. On GitHub https://github.com/denoland/deno is 22.8% JavaScript and 13.2% TypeScript, and https://github.com/denoland/deno_std is 68.2% JavaScript and 31.6% TypeScript.

So to me it's misleading about the name, but not about what Deno is written in.