On 6/14/2010 3:07 AM, rantingrick wrote:
Sorry Terry -- with all the noise here the very few "quality" signals
just seem to be lost on my "auditory cortex".
I think you will be both happier and more productive if you train
yourself to pay more attention to signal and let noise go by.
We are at once lucky to have a built in editor
It is certainly a boon to someone like me who now only programs in
Python and had no experience, let alone commitment to any of the current
alternative.
Some peeves:
The tabs in the shell and four spaces in the editor is just complete
nonsense! The fact that the shell does not insert a "... "
continuation is a real nuance!
1. I agree.
2. This does not much affect me since I do not directly enter compound
statement with more than, say, 2 lines in the body, even with the
command window interpreter. I much prefer a full screen editor.
> The constant "zombie" processes requiring explicit kills via task manager
> are quite annoying
There was a thread about this a few months ago. As I reported then,
there is only a problem (for me, at least) when one severs the
connection to the background process with control-C. Since I almost
never need to do that except when testing ;-), this is not a problem.
As I believe I also reported then, a third process is started each time
one hit RUN F5 from an edit window, but the old background process goes
away in about 4 seconds. No need to kill it.
Not to mention the fact
that a file dialog, replace dialog, or find dialog can lose focus and
drop to the bottom of the window stack faster than Obama's approval
ratings after BP takes a leak!
I have not noticed this.
One feature i would like to create is an ability to redo the last
command. Pressing an F* key should return you to the last block for
editing. Why have a traceback clutter up the output when you made a
simple little mistake? I hate to have a shell just cluttered with
exceptions. Also the ability to clear the buffer and maybe also remove
*all* exceptions might be an added bonus for our "tidy" minded
friends.
I agree that the interactive shell could me make more useful.
But digging a bit deeper... not only is the UI awful, but the code
itself is just awful. That may be the reason why i start to fix it,
get frustrated, and then shortly after quit.
When I tried to read the IDLE code with an eye to helping with patches,
I got lost in the setup code before I even got to the tk gui code. So I
can easily imagine that it might be better organized to be more easily
read and maintained. Perhaps I will try again some time.
Terry Jan Reedy
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
