On 7/20/2014 9:22 PM, Rick Johnson wrote:
On Sunday, July 20, 2014 4:52:36 PM UTC-5, Terry Reedy wrote:
The *real* problem is that the "interactive events" of the
"editor window" and the "interactive events" of the "shell
window" are far too tightly integrated with one another.
I myself appreciate the finger saving principles of "DRY",
however, sometimes, two distinct functionalities just
cannot be implemented *IN A CLEAR MANNER* without repeating
*some* of the code.
We need to understand that IDLE is split into two distinct
"modes", if you will -- the "interactive shell" and the
"editor window". Attempting to use the same code to handle
keystrokes for the shell *AND* the editor is a stumbling
block to extending this mess.
Slightly simplifying, the shell window and output windows are subclasses
of the current editor window. I have thought about making all three
inherit from a base interactive window. This would be a bit cleaner than
the current design. I am not convinced of the need for more drastic change.
Ideas don't count until recorded on the tracker.
Which, as I reported back here, is why I promptly included both your
OutputUndo idea and suggestion for a separate event and shortcut key in
a new issue on the tracker.
Hmm, okay.
Saimadhav has locked together a thin canvas with the text
for line numbers. It works in all my texts. I am just
waiting for him to try it with a thin text instead. If you
know some secret you think he missed. please describe it
here.
How can i offer improvements if i don't know where to find
the code?
http://bugs.python.org/issue17535
And besides, if my comments here "don't count"
The ideas that I think are worth preserving and that I think are
appropriate for the tracker I will put on the tracker. You can comment
directly on the tracker yourself, but you would have to moderate your style.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
