On 5/25/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Douglas S. Blank</b> <<a href="mailto:dblank@brynmawr.edu">dblank@brynmawr.edu</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Fri, May 25, 2007 10:04 am, Tal Einat said:<br>> On 5/25/07, Tal Einat <<a href="mailto:taleinat@gmail.com">taleinat@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>>><br>>> On 5/24/07, Douglas S. Blank <<a href="mailto:dblank@brynmawr.edu">
dblank@brynmawr.edu</a>> wrote:<br>>> ><br>>> ><br>>> > Some other suggestions:<br>>> ><br>>> > 1) Make the default color syntax formatter default to python before<br>>> > saving
<br>>> > an unnamed buffer. Most people use IDLE for editing Python files, so<br>>> > that<br>>> > seems reasonable. Of course, saving the file in another format would<br>>> > still<br>
>> > change the formatter.<br>>><br>>><br>>> Sounds reasonable to me as well. I believe this has already been asked<br>>> for<br>>> in the past, I'll have to look it up.<br>>>
<br>><br>> This is already implemented in IDLE, and was committed to the SVN in<br>> revision 38991 back in 2005. Surely IDLE 1.2 (the version shipped with<br>> Python2.5) does this. Which version of IDLE are you using?
<br><br>Thanks for the info. Because not all of the Python libraries we depend on<br>have been brought up-to-date on Windows, we had been stuck with Python<br>2.4. I tried to pull out the latest idlelib from Python2.5 and put it in
<br>2.4, but it utilizes Python2.5 functionality. I didn't spend a lot of time<br>on that, but it would be great if idle was a little more backwards<br>compatible. I wonder how hard it would be to make it 2.4/2.5 agnostic?
</blockquote><div><br>Not hard at all. I actually have a working version of IDLE which is backwards compatible all the way back to Python2.2. But this my development version, with all sorts of new features. It is stable though, I use it daily, and it is in use by about ten of my friends. I'd gladly send you a copy.
<br><br>IDLE isn't currently be kept backwards compatible because it is developed as an integral part of CPython. There are a few stdlib modules which are kept backward compatible (email and compiler IIRC), but IDLE is not, unfortunately.
<br><br>The changes required are small, and a few #ifdefs (or equivalent) in the code could make backwards compatibility simple. It would be hard to convince the guys who build CPython to adopt this, though.<br></div><br>
- Tal<br></div>