RE: [Idle-dev] IDLE "deemphasised"? Please not so...
I agree with these sentiments and am copying this message to the Edu and Tutor lists because I think the folks there are a good part of the demand that you mention below. --- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech "I am, therefore I think." -----Original Message----- From: idle-dev-admin@python.org [mailto:idle-dev-admin@python.org]On Behalf Of Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 4:46 AM To: idle-dev@python.org Subject: [Idle-dev] IDLE "deemphasised"? Please not so... In Wesley Chun's thread on amending IDLE, Guido said:
The problem is that IDLE development has virtually come to a halt -- I just can't find the time to work on it, and there are other good development environments available.
Mats Wichmann then said:
As Guido knows, I'm certainly interested in IDLE evolving, because I find it a very handy learning tool - not just for me; like Wesley, I try to teach some Python classes from time to time. There may be "better" IDEs but I'm not convinced I've seen one yet (for Python). And in my particular situation, it HAS to be cross-platform, I'm not going to fuss with two different IDEs in a classroom situation (students get to choose Win2k or Linux).
But I suspect most "serious programmers" don't really see IDLE as being a "serious IDE" - at least I gather this impression from comments on c.l.p, esp. from folks who come from other (inferior?) languages where an IDE is essential to maintaining any sanity, so they've evolved into quite sophisticated tools. So I don't know if there'd be a whole lot of overall enthusiam for doing a lot to IDLE.
Whilst I understand all about not having time for things because there are other things to do (!), I do think it would be a pity if IDLE died away. It seems to me there is a serious place for a moderately decent editor that comes free with the Python disttribution, knows *about* Python, and uses Tkinter (i.e., is maximally portable). Whilst there might be *better* IDEs (in various senses of the word - heck, I use XEmacs for "normal" work, does that count?), there is *great* utility in having a reasonable editor that undestands Python up and running as soon as one has Python up and running (e.g., on Windows). After all, the alternative may well be Wordpad/Notepad. Other IDEs involve other work (to set up), or even money. And for some of us, each program coming in has to be paper-justified, so it may well not be worth the effort anyway, even for free code. If it helps, I'm satisfied with having an editor that understands Python layout, and provides some debugging and class browsing support - if that isn't a "proper" IDE I don't care (and I think I'm a moderately serious programmer - it's been what I get paid for for a while now). What do I actually want? Well, given Guido and co aren't going to do much with IDLE in the future, I'd vote to at least keep it around, and mention it as existing, and I'd hope that it might grow slowly via sourceforge. Just don't underestimate the demand for it. Tibs -- Tony J Ibbs (Tibs) http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/ "How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks." - Dorothy L. Sayers, "Gaudy Night" My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.) _______________________________________________ IDLE-dev mailing list IDLE-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev
It seems to me that the VPython folk are the perfect ones to pick up the IDLE development reins. They're actively working on IDLE already, have already implemented the autosave mentioned, as well as some others, and generally seem willing and interested. I'm not sure what the reasoning is for keeping the VPython IDLE off in its own fork and not bringing it in as the official IDLE, since it is being actively developed. --Dethe on 01/6/20 08:57 AM, Patrick K. O'Brien at pobrien@orbtech.com wrote:
I agree with these sentiments and am copying this message to the Edu and Tutor lists because I think the folks there are a good part of the demand that you mention below.
In Wesley Chun's thread on amending IDLE, Guido said:
The problem is that IDLE development has virtually come to a halt -- I just can't find the time to work on it, and there are other good development environments available.
Mats Wichmann then said:
As Guido knows, I'm certainly interested in IDLE evolving, because I find it a very handy learning tool - not just for me; like Wesley, I try to teach some Python classes from time to time. There may be "better" IDEs but I'm not convinced I've seen one yet (for Python). And in my particular situation, it HAS to be cross-platform, I'm not going to fuss with two different IDEs in a classroom situation (students get to choose Win2k or Linux).
But I suspect most "serious programmers" don't really see IDLE as being a "serious IDE" - at least I gather this impression from comments on c.l.p, esp. from folks who come from other (inferior?) languages where an IDE is essential to maintaining any sanity, so they've evolved into quite sophisticated tools. So I don't know if there'd be a whole lot of overall enthusiam for doing a lot to IDLE.
Whilst I understand all about not having time for things because there are other things to do (!), I do think it would be a pity if IDLE died away. It seems to me there is a serious place for a moderately decent editor that comes free with the Python disttribution, knows *about* Python, and uses Tkinter (i.e., is maximally portable).
Whilst there might be *better* IDEs (in various senses of the word - heck, I use XEmacs for "normal" work, does that count?), there is *great* utility in having a reasonable editor that undestands Python up and running as soon as one has Python up and running (e.g., on Windows). After all, the alternative may well be Wordpad/Notepad.
Other IDEs involve other work (to set up), or even money. And for some of us, each program coming in has to be paper-justified, so it may well not be worth the effort anyway, even for free code.
If it helps, I'm satisfied with having an editor that understands Python layout, and provides some debugging and class browsing support - if that isn't a "proper" IDE I don't care (and I think I'm a moderately serious programmer - it's been what I get paid for for a while now).
What do I actually want? Well, given Guido and co aren't going to do much with IDLE in the future, I'd vote to at least keep it around, and mention it as existing, and I'd hope that it might grow slowly via sourceforge. Just don't underestimate the demand for it.
Tibs
-- Dethe Elza Chief Mad Scientist Burning Tiger Technologies
It seems to me that the VPython folk are the perfect ones to pick up the IDLE development reins. They're actively working on IDLE already, have already implemented the autosave mentioned, as well as some others, and generally seem willing and interested. I'm not sure what the reasoning is for keeping the VPython IDLE off in its own fork and not bringing it in as the official IDLE, since it is being actively developed.
I think it was that I wanted to keep control over the direction in which IDLE was going. The idle-fork SourceForge project was created so they could do their development. But I don't think much happened there, and I haven't really done much except stifle IDLE development, so I'm ready to relax my control. I do have that subprocess-running code which I would like to get worked into IDLE first though... --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
That's great news! Are the VPython folks listening? --Dethe on 01/6/20 11:06 AM, Guido van Rossum at guido@digicool.com wrote:
It seems to me that the VPython folk are the perfect ones to pick up the IDLE development reins. They're actively working on IDLE already, have already implemented the autosave mentioned, as well as some others, and generally seem willing and interested. I'm not sure what the reasoning is for keeping the VPython IDLE off in its own fork and not bringing it in as the official IDLE, since it is being actively developed.
I think it was that I wanted to keep control over the direction in which IDLE was going. The idle-fork SourceForge project was created so they could do their development. But I don't think much happened there, and I haven't really done much except stifle IDLE development, so I'm ready to relax my control. I do have that subprocess-running code which I would like to get worked into IDLE first though...
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
-- Dethe Elza Chief Mad Scientist Burning Tiger Technologies
Except that the VPython folks have a design goal that is quite tangential to IDLE's. They need a tool to support their visual python modules (which allow the manipulation of 3D objects and should not to be confused with ActiveState's IDE) and the teaching of physics. While I do think their needs should be accomodated, I don't know that they would want to be responsible for IDLE development as a whole. (But I could be wrong.) I've added them to the recipients of this message. We'll see if they respond. (The vpython list has been quiet lately.) --- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech "I am, therefore I think." -----Original Message----- From: tutor-admin@python.org [mailto:tutor-admin@python.org]On Behalf Of Dethe Elza Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 3:20 PM To: IDLE Developers List Cc: Python Edu SIG; Python Tutor Subject: [Tutor] Re: [Edu-sig] RE: [Idle-dev] IDLE "deemphasised"? Please not so... That's great news! Are the VPython folks listening? --Dethe on 01/6/20 11:06 AM, Guido van Rossum at guido@digicool.com wrote:
It seems to me that the VPython folk are the perfect ones to pick up the IDLE development reins. They're actively working on IDLE already, have already implemented the autosave mentioned, as well as some others, and generally seem willing and interested. I'm not sure what the reasoning is for keeping the VPython IDLE off in its own fork and not bringing it in as the official IDLE, since it is being actively developed.
I think it was that I wanted to keep control over the direction in which IDLE was going. The idle-fork SourceForge project was created so they could do their development. But I don't think much happened there, and I haven't really done much except stifle IDLE development, so I'm ready to relax my control. I do have that subprocess-running code which I would like to get worked into IDLE first though...
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
-- Dethe Elza Chief Mad Scientist Burning Tiger Technologies _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
Concerning VPython and IDLE: At the same time that he created the Visual module, which provides remarkably easy 3D animated graphics for Python (Visual + Python = VPython), David Scherer made major changes to IDLE, including: executes scripts in a separate process for stability excludes system modules from tracebacks usability changes, including reorganized menus autosave on every run, with infinite un-do scrolling output has a header marking the start of each run This has turned out to be an ideal environment for novices (as measured by use by a large number of physics students), and is also an excellent rapid edit-run environment for experts. Alas, there is no active work on this at present, because Scherer is not currently in a situation where he can spend time on this, and we have no one else in the project currently capable of pushing this forward. It is certainly the case that Scherer's version of IDLE is an exceptionally promising candidate to become the "official" IDLE, but unfortunately we are not able to lead the charge right now. Bruce Sherwood P.S. We have just released VPython for Python 2.1 on Windows: http://cil.andrew.cmu.edu/projects/visual This new release installs Scherer's IDLE in Tools/idle_VPython, leaving the standard IDLE in place. Desktop and start-menu icons are added that access the VPython version of IDLE.
P.S. We have just released VPython for Python 2.1 on Windows:
http://cil.andrew.cmu.edu/projects/visual
This new release installs Scherer's IDLE in Tools/idle_VPython, leaving the standard IDLE in place. Desktop and start-menu icons are added that access the VPython version of IDLE.
Excellent!! I'm gonna grab mine now. Cheers, Kirby
At 08:27 PM 6/20/2001 -0700, Kirby Urner wrote:
P.S. We have just released VPython for Python 2.1 on Windows:
http://cil.andrew.cmu.edu/projects/visual
This new release installs Scherer's IDLE in Tools/idle_VPython, leaving the standard IDLE in place. Desktop and start-menu icons are added that access the VPython version of IDLE.
Excellent!!
I'm gonna grab mine now.
Cheers,
Kirby
Took only seconds to grab and install. Works like a charm. Arthur, your PyGeo package is running way smoother now that I have an official VPython 2.1. Pascal3d is trouble free -- was something of a mess earlier. This is great! Kirby
Question: in Python 1.5.2 I see there was a module: poly -- Polynomials. [1] Part of the standard library. Wondering what happened to it, is there an easy way to get a copy short of downloading the whole of old Python? I'm looking for a way to generate roots of a poly. I found Laguerre's method in Haskell [2]. Maybe there's something similar in Python -- I'll search some more (it's not that I haven't been looking...). Kirby [1] http://starship.python.net/quick-ref1_52.html [2] http://www.numeric-quest.com/haskell/Roots.html
participants (5)
-
Bruce Sherwood -
Dethe Elza -
Guido van Rossum -
Kirby Urner -
Patrick K. O'Brien