Stephen Toledo-Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've not tried Mac, but under both Windows and Linux on x86, I find
> Eclipse (3.0) is slow with less than 1.25 GB of RAM, reasonably fast
> with 1.5GB or more. Processor speed and disk speed don't seem to be
> anywhere near as important.
I've use
Markus Wankus wrote:
>
> My opinion - If you aren't willing to try something new, or have an
> aversion to it in the first place, nothing we can say will change your
> mind.
Correction...
*There are some people, who* if they aren't willing to try something
new, or have an aversion to it in th
Stephen Toledo-Brown wrote:
> Tony Meyer wrote:
>
>>> Everyone complaining about Eclipse in this thread needs to go try
>>> 3.1. The interface is much much much more responsive.
>>
>>
>>
>> The problem with Eclipse, IMO, is Java. I've tried 3.1 on a WinXP
>> machine
>> and, like just about any
Tony Meyer wrote:
>>Everyone complaining about Eclipse in this thread needs to go
>>try 3.1. The interface is much much much more responsive.
>
>
> The problem with Eclipse, IMO, is Java. I've tried 3.1 on a WinXP machine
> and, like just about any Java program, it's incredibly slow and a real
> For me, performance is the minor issue. Usability is the major issue. If
> find Eclipse to be highly unusable, so I don't use it.
I find it to be the best option out there
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Tony Meyer wrote:
> It would be interesting to know which JRE the Eclipse advocates are
> using, and which the people that dislike Eclipse are using...
For me, performance is the minor issue. Usability is the major issue. If
find Eclipse to be highly unusable, so I don't use it.
Tim Delaney
--
> "Java" as a term means different things to different people,
Agreed. Python is similar in this respect - it's common to refer to cPython
here as Python, for example.
> but I expect most would think of the core language and its
> standard library first and the JRE/JVM second. So saying "the
"Tony Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Your first sentence contradicts the rest of your post; how is
> > Java the problem if it runs nice on a Mac and is sluggish on
> > Windows ?
>
> Because any Java program on (any version of) Windows (in my experience) is
> sluggish, and this is not true (
> Your first sentence contradicts the rest of your post; how is
> Java the problem if it runs nice on a Mac and is sluggish on
> Windows ?
Because any Java program on (any version of) Windows (in my experience) is
sluggish, and this is not true (again, in my experience) for Java programs
on a Ma
"Tony Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem with Eclipse, IMO, is Java. I've tried 3.1 on a WinXP machine
> and, like just about any Java program, it's incredibly slow and a real pain
> to use. On a (similarly spec'd) Mac OS X Tiger machine, it runs nice and
> smoothly and is reasonabl
> Everyone complaining about Eclipse in this thread needs to go
> try 3.1. The interface is much much much more responsive.
The problem with Eclipse, IMO, is Java. I've tried 3.1 on a WinXP machine
and, like just about any Java program, it's incredibly slow and a real pain
to use. On a (similar
Joseph Garvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, everyone keeps discussing Eclipse as something that gives Java a
> leg up on Python. *Ahem* PyDev :) Which you should also give another
> try if you haven't in a few versions. Easiest way to get a GUI
> debugger for python.
Can you give a brief de
Everyone complaining about Eclipse in this thread needs to go try 3.1.
The interface is much much much more responsive.
Also, everyone keeps discussing Eclipse as something that gives Java a
leg up on Python. *Ahem* PyDev :) Which you should also give another try
if you haven't in a few version
> "Fabio" == Fabio Zadrozny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I agree about the project management part. Though I would still love
>> to use Eclipse instead, if it only was supported for my line of work
>> :-/.
Fabio> What line of work is not supported in eclipse?
C++ programmin
D H <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Dave Benjamin wrote:
> > Someone in the audience surprised everyone by mentioning an actual project
> > attempting this, called javaclass:
>
> Sounds like it really is converting java classes to python classes,
Yes, it is conv
Ville Vainio wrote:
>>"Timothy" == Delaney, Timothy (Tim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>
>
>Timothy> Absolutely. I've really tried to use Eclipse - it's the
>Timothy> standard editor for my current project (Java - blegh!). I
>Timothy> *hate* it. It's huge, bu
> "Timothy" == Delaney, Timothy (Tim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Timothy> Absolutely. I've really tried to use Eclipse - it's the
Timothy> standard editor for my current project (Java - blegh!). I
Timothy> *hate* it. It's huge, bulky, slow ... I've gone back to
Timothy> my tex
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Markus Wankus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>just think it is silly not to benefit from them.
In which case you misunderstood me - I never said people should not use
them, just that they should not be relied on for productivity
improvements. They must factor in at a
Stephen Kellett wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Markus Wankus
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>> Have you ever tried anything that provides real, usable refactoring
>> like Eclipse does with Java? I guarantee if you used it more than a
>> few times your view would most likely change.
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Markus Wankus
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Have you ever tried anything that provides real, usable refactoring
>like Eclipse does with Java? I guarantee if you used it more than a
>few times your view would most likely change.
I was forced to use Eclipse recently
Stephen Kellett wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Simon
> Brunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>> Eclipse's refactorings are a great boon, I find. Refectoring is never
>> *fully* automatic, of course, but the ability to, for example, select
>> a chunk of code and have it extracted into a
Sakesun Roykiattisak wrote:
>
>> What's being ignored is that type information is useful for other things
>> than compile type checking. The major case in point is the way IDEs
>> such as IntelliJ and Eclipse use type information to do refactoring, code
>> completion and eventually numerous other
Stephen Kellett wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Simon
> Brunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>> Eclipse's refactorings are a great boon, I find. Refectoring is never
>> *fully* automatic, of course, but the ability to, for example, select
>> a chunk of code and have it extracted into a
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Simon
Brunning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Eclipse's refactorings are a great boon, I find. Refectoring is never
>*fully* automatic, of course, but the ability to, for example, select
>a chunk of code and have it extracted into a separate method with all
>needed arg
On 6/27/05, Sakesun Roykiattisak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Automatic refactoring never solve the readability issue.
Eclipse's refactorings are a great boon, I find. Refectoring is never
*fully* automatic, of course, but the ability to, for example, select
a chunk of code and have it extracte
On 6/26/05, John Roth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's being ignored is that type information is useful for other things
> than compile type checking. The major case in point is the way IDEs
> such as IntelliJ and Eclipse use type information to do refactoring, code
> completion and eventually n
Dave Benjamin wrote:
> Guido gave a good, long interview, available at IT Conversations, as was
> recently announced by Dr. Dobb's Python-URL! The audio clips are available
> here:
>
> http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail545.html
> http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail559.html
Than
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ivan Van Laningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Aahz wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps. But adding the time to learn those IDEs in addition to the time
>> to learn Java is ridiculous. I've been forced to use Java a bit to
>> support credit cards for our web application; I've g
Aahz wrote:
> Perhaps. But adding the time to learn those IDEs in addition to the
> time
> to learn Java is ridiculous. I've been forced to use Java a bit to
> support credit cards for our web application; I've got a friend whose
> Java-vs-Python argument hinges on the use of Eclipse; I was una
Hi All--
Aahz wrote:
>
> Perhaps. But adding the time to learn those IDEs in addition to the time
> to learn Java is ridiculous. I've been forced to use Java a bit to
> support credit cards for our web application; I've got a friend whose
> Java-vs-Python argument hinges on the use of Eclipse;
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Roth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>What's being ignored is that type information is useful for other
>things than compile type checking. The major case in point is the
>way IDEs such as IntelliJ and Eclipse use type information to do
>refactoring, code completio
>What's being ignored is that type information is useful for other things
>than compile type checking. The major case in point is the way IDEs
>such as IntelliJ and Eclipse use type information to do refactoring, code
>completion and eventually numerous other things. A Java programmer
>using Intel
Dave Benjamin wrote:
> ...
> I think Python's decision to use reference counting was an instance of
> worse-is-better: at the time, reference counting was already known not to be
> "the right thing", but it worked, and the implementation was simple.
> Likewise with dynamic typing versus type infer
"Steven D'Aprano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are welcome to change the specifications of findall() and turn it into
> an iterator which returns each match one at a time instead of all at once,
> but then the name is misleading, wouldn't you agree?
The regex module has since 2.2 a function (
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 23:49:40 -0600, John Roth wrote:
>>> What's being ignored is that type information is useful for other
>>> things than compile type checking. The major case in point is the way
>>> IDEs such as IntelliJ and Eclipse use type information to do
>>> refactoring, code completion and
"Steven D'Aprano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:31:20 -0600, John Roth wrote:
>
>>
>> "Dave Benjamin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Guido gave a good, long interview, available at IT Conversations, as was
>
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:31:20 -0600, John Roth wrote:
>
> "Dave Benjamin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Guido gave a good, long interview, available at IT Conversations, as was
>> recently announced by Dr. Dobb's Python-URL! The audio clips are available
>
> [s
Dave Benjamin wrote:
> One thing Guido mentions in his comparison of ABC (Python's
predecessor) and
> Python is how ABC was inextricably tied to its environment (a la
Smalltalk),
What surprised me was that this was the only thing he really mentioned.
He didn't mention anything about the the
"Dave Benjamin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Guido gave a good, long interview, available at IT Conversations, as was
> recently announced by Dr. Dobb's Python-URL! The audio clips are available
[snip]
> - Java: the usual static vs. dynamic, static analysis vs.
39 matches
Mail list logo
