[Idle-dev] Documentation on Unix/Linux

[Stephen M. Gava]

Bruce Sherwood wrote:
> Thanks for this and your other comments on this issue. I guess I can see
> that in the Linux environment it makes sense for the user to assemble
> pieces and customize everything, and the user doesn't expect a fully
> integrated programming environment. This wouldn't work for novices, but
> then novices aren't likely to use Linux anyway.

I think It's probably better to try to avoid these kind of broad 
generalisations about platforms or what different kinds of users want. How 
customisable or 'integrated' all the various users of python on Windows or 
Linux or Mac or BSD or Solaris or other unices  want their working 
environment to be isn't really a black and white issue. IDLE is intended to 
be somewhat integrated but with an emphasis on simplicity (have a look at the 
IDLE/IDLEfork "mission statement"  at http://idlefork.sourceforge.net ). But 
it's horses for courses even for each individual and not just for each 
platform. For instance I do a lot of work on windows 2000 using Delphi, which 
is way more integrated than idle will ever aspire to be (and way more even 
than the most complex commercial python IDE's out there currently are), and I 
like it just fine.  Whereas on both windows  and  *nix  I never used to use 
idle at all until I became interested in it while using it for a teaching 
tool.  Now I try to do a lot of my python development in it (particularly on 
idlefork itself) so that I can be as aware as I can of just how it feels, 
what shortcommings seem most glaring, etc., as just one part of the process 
of testing and improving in the ongoing work on idlefork. On the other hand 
again, Kylix, the equivalent of Delphi on Linux, is just as 'hyper 
integrated' as Delphi itself and it feels quite appropriate that way. 

Anyway may point  (which I may have strayed just as far as usual from :) was 
meant to be that  I  think idle will benefit  from not trying to put it in 
too narrow a category but focussing on its own aims like light weight,  
non-complexity, portabilty  and such.  

Straying off topic for this list, I think on the separate issue of platforms  
(again only my opinnion!), that it's a choice which should depend squarely on 
what is most useful for you in what you're trying to achieve with that 
particular tool (the computer) at the time.  ...I think this view might put 
me well out of favour with zealots from all sides.  8^)   Although, if I had 
to nominate one which I think is all around pretty excellent at the moment 
I'd have to go for OSX... it sems to me that apple has finally pulled off the 
incerdible coup of putting a simple but flexible interface on top of the 
power of unix and I hope it's a big success for them. 
-- 
Stephen M. Gava  <elguavas@users.sourceforge.net>
IDLEfork ( http://idlefork.sourceforge.net )  " just like IDLE, only crunchy "