From M.N.SUMMERFIELD.405728 at swansea.ac.uk  Fri Feb 17 16:28:27 2006
From: M.N.SUMMERFIELD.405728 at swansea.ac.uk (Mark Summerfield)
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:28:27 +0000
Subject: [Idle-dev] auto-loading at shell start and shell restart
Message-ID: <200602171528.27996.405728@swansea.ac.uk>

Hi,

I love using IDLE, both for experimenting with python and for
calculations.

But every time I start IDLE for calculations I have to type in:

    from __future__ import division
    from math import *

which would be bearable if I only had to do it once a day... but when I
experiment I often have my code in a separate python file, so I do:

    import mycode

then do my experiments, then, when I've hit problems or want to move
forward, I do Shell|Restart, and use ^P a few times to get the import
line back. Which is fine, except that if I've done a lot between imports
and I want to switch between testing mycode.py and some calculations I
end up having to type

    from __future__ import division
    from math import *

time after time.

I wish there was some standard way (i.e. in Options) of having a list of
python commands to issue whenever the shell is started or restarted.

Regards.

-- 
Mark Summerfield


From alex at kirkwoodproductions.com  Thu Feb 16 01:55:56 2006
From: alex at kirkwoodproductions.com (Alex Kirkwood)
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:55:56 -0800
Subject: [Idle-dev] Potential Bug
Message-ID: <7768B88C-B0ED-47FF-922E-D156871F126B@kirkwoodproductions.com>

To Whom This May Concern,

I'm using python for mac and am noticing some inconsistency with  
regard to the color highlighting for certain keywords such as "def"  
and "input".  Upon opening the IDLE the first edit window will always  
color highlight.  If I open another editor window the text is always  
black and I can't see the highlighting.  I'm currently taking  
Computer Programming at Chapman University and would like to thank  
you guys for creating this academic language, it's really quite fun  
to work with.

If you have any suggestions towards my problem please let me know.

Thanks,

Alex Kirkwood

From noamraph at gmail.com  Fri Feb 24 01:14:05 2006
From: noamraph at gmail.com (Noam Raphael)
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 02:14:05 +0200
Subject: [Idle-dev] Potential Bug
In-Reply-To: <7768B88C-B0ED-47FF-922E-D156871F126B@kirkwoodproductions.com>
References: <7768B88C-B0ED-47FF-922E-D156871F126B@kirkwoodproductions.com>
Message-ID: <b348a0850602231614v65659678jf1b5c8d28c10255e@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

Will the second window start colouring the text once saved with a
".py" extension?

Noam

On 2/16/06, Alex Kirkwood <alex at kirkwoodproductions.com> wrote:
> To Whom This May Concern,
>
> I'm using python for mac and am noticing some inconsistency with
> regard to the color highlighting for certain keywords such as "def"
> and "input".  Upon opening the IDLE the first edit window will always
> color highlight.  If I open another editor window the text is always
> black and I can't see the highlighting.  I'm currently taking
> Computer Programming at Chapman University and would like to thank
> you guys for creating this academic language, it's really quite fun
> to work with.
>
> If you have any suggestions towards my problem please let me know.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alex Kirkwood
> _______________________________________________
> IDLE-dev mailing list
> IDLE-dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev
>

From noamraph at gmail.com  Fri Feb 24 01:18:58 2006
From: noamraph at gmail.com (Noam Raphael)
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 02:18:58 +0200
Subject: [Idle-dev] auto-loading at shell start and shell restart
In-Reply-To: <200602171528.27996.405728@swansea.ac.uk>
References: <200602171528.27996.405728@swansea.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <b348a0850602231618m509e000bi883ad809cf402bf4@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

You can try to set the environment variable PYTHONSTARTUP to a file
with all those lines that you always run when you start working. It
should work fine with Python-in-a-terminal - perhaps you should test
it first.

IDLE should run those commands on startup, if given the -s flag. It
doesn't re-run it if you restart the shell. I worked with a friend of
mine on fixing this, and perhaps I'll post it as a patch.

Have a good day,
Noam

On 2/17/06, Mark Summerfield <M.N.SUMMERFIELD.405728 at swansea.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I love using IDLE, both for experimenting with python and for
> calculations.
>
> But every time I start IDLE for calculations I have to type in:
>
>     from __future__ import division
>     from math import *
>
> which would be bearable if I only had to do it once a day... but when I
> experiment I often have my code in a separate python file, so I do:
>
>     import mycode
>
> then do my experiments, then, when I've hit problems or want to move
> forward, I do Shell|Restart, and use ^P a few times to get the import
> line back. Which is fine, except that if I've done a lot between imports
> and I want to switch between testing mycode.py and some calculations I
> end up having to type
>
>     from __future__ import division
>     from math import *
>
> time after time.
>
> I wish there was some standard way (i.e. in Options) of having a list of
> python commands to issue whenever the shell is started or restarted.
>
> Regards.
>
> --
> Mark Summerfield
>
> _______________________________________________
> IDLE-dev mailing list
> IDLE-dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev
>

From M.N.SUMMERFIELD.405728 at swansea.ac.uk  Fri Feb 24 09:30:31 2006
From: M.N.SUMMERFIELD.405728 at swansea.ac.uk (Mark Summerfield)
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 08:30:31 +0000
Subject: [Idle-dev] auto-loading at shell start and shell restart
In-Reply-To: <b348a0850602231618m509e000bi883ad809cf402bf4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200602171528.27996.405728@swansea.ac.uk>
	<b348a0850602231618m509e000bi883ad809cf402bf4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200602240830.31980.405728@swansea.ac.uk>

On Friday 24 February 2006 00:18, Noam Raphael wrote:
> Hello,
>
> You can try to set the environment variable PYTHONSTARTUP to a file
> with all those lines that you always run when you start working. It
> should work fine with Python-in-a-terminal - perhaps you should test
> it first.
>
> IDLE should run those commands on startup, if given the -s flag. It
> doesn't re-run it if you restart the shell. I worked with a friend of
> mine on fixing this, and perhaps I'll post it as a patch.

Thanks for the advice. I put the two lines in a file and used the -s
option having set $IDLESTARTUP, and then again using $PYTHONSTARTUP. In
both cases the 
    from math import *
line worked correctly, but the 
    from __future__ import division
line was ignored.

> On 2/17/06, Mark Summerfield <M.N.SUMMERFIELD.405728 at swansea.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I love using IDLE, both for experimenting with python and for
> > calculations.
> >
> > But every time I start IDLE for calculations I have to type in:
> >
> >     from __future__ import division
> >     from math import *
> >
> > which would be bearable if I only had to do it once a day... but when I
> > experiment I often have my code in a separate python file, so I do:
> >
> >     import mycode
> >
> > then do my experiments, then, when I've hit problems or want to move
> > forward, I do Shell|Restart, and use ^P a few times to get the import
> > line back. Which is fine, except that if I've done a lot between imports
> > and I want to switch between testing mycode.py and some calculations I
> > end up having to type
> >
> >     from __future__ import division
> >     from math import *
> >
> > time after time.
> >
> > I wish there was some standard way (i.e. in Options) of having a list of
> > python commands to issue whenever the shell is started or restarted.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > --
> > Mark Summerfield
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IDLE-dev mailing list
> > IDLE-dev at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev

-- 
Mark Summerfield


From spe.stani.be at gmail.com  Tue Feb 28 21:51:59 2006
From: spe.stani.be at gmail.com (SPE Stani's Python Editor)
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 21:51:59 +0100
Subject: [Idle-dev] =?iso-8859-1?q?Fwd=3A_Discussion=3A_2_many_IDE=27s=2E?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?=2E=2Edon=B4t_we_want_more=3F!?=
In-Reply-To: <2078a7ad0602241700j30061e72nd9db37918d5208b1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2078a7ad0602201618q12f19797p1e0501ae0703fdc2@mail.gmail.com>
	<2078a7ad0602230811j39c1b3cfk808cbf1f56dac178@mail.gmail.com>
	<2078a7ad0602241650w26b1f3a3m4e4836471c13940@mail.gmail.com>
	<2078a7ad0602241700j30061e72nd9db37918d5208b1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2078a7ad0602281251p35956fd1pe436a6edd68744ae@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Kurt, Noam and every other IDLE developer,

I tried to send you this by mail, but maybe it didn't arrive. 
drPython and Eric3 joined as well.

I would be very glad to receive your reaction.

Thanks in advance,
Stani

Ps The original thread starts here:
http://lists.wxwidgets.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?11:iis:48072#b nr98
Please read the next messages as much as you can. I'll put up a
mailing list soon.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SPE Stani's Python Editor <spe.stani.be at gmail.com>
Date: Feb 25, 2006 2:00 AM
Subject: Fwd: Discussion: 2 many IDE's...don?t we want more?!
To: kbk at xxx.net, noamraph at xxx.com


Hi Kurt and Noam,

I've posted this on the wxPython mailing list some days ago. I'm
trying to bundle open source efforts concerning a (python) IDE, instead of
having a fragmentated landscape as it is
now. For now the team consists of four developpers:
- Limodou (NewEdit IDE)
- Matt Freyer (ActiveGrid IDE)
- Andrea Gavana
- Myself, Stani (SPE IDE)
...but I'd like to have you in as well.

The first step as I see it is try to bring all active IDE developpers
together. I hope you join the party.  A lot of us wrote a decent IDE,
but we would be blind if there is not a lot of duplicated effort,
which is in a way a pitty. If we can work together it might speedup
the process and make an IDE which is even better, as the one we wrote
till now. (Java is still far ahead of us with eclipse.)

Of course you use Tkinter but with a common agreed design pattern views
or user interfaces could be developped independently,so that would not
prevent us from working on a core api.

I don't know if it is appropiate to mail this message to you both (as
I presume you're leading the IDLE project), but please pass the
message through to the right people.

Please let me know what you think. I'm open for every suggestion.

Stani


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SPE Stani's Python Editor <spe.stani.be at gmail.com>
Date: Feb 21, 2006 1:18 AM
Subject: Discussion: 2 many IDE's...don?t we want more?!
To: limodou <limodou at gmail.com>, Josiah Carlson <jcarlson at uci.edu>,
Kevin Altis <altis at semi-retired.com>, riaan at e.co.za, kaworu
<goku1980 at libero.it>, Ed Leafe <ed at leafe.com>, Matt Fryer
<mfryer at activegrid.com>, drpython at bluebottle.com,
wxPython-users at lists.wxwidgets.org


Dear IDE developpers and wxPython NG,

I hope this might provoke an productive discussion with a happy end...

The Python wiki (http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonEditors) boasts a
nice list of editors of which quite some are written in Python.

Choice is always good. If these were commercial projects, one could
add: competition is always better, as we all know the disadvantages of
a monopoly. But I doubt this is the best. Open Source could be about
collaboration, putting all our brains together and produce a mind
blowing IDE, in which we offer the user also choice but in a different
way. Instead of having to choose between IDE's, the user can select
the components he wants and tailor his IDE. Even if we could converge
all existing wxPython IDE?s to one there is still plenty of choice.
Some of the IDE projects might be not so active anymore, by which a
lot of labour and knowledge can vanish. In general a good project
might be too fragile if not a team is behind it. This might seem no
problem as another new IDE might pop up, who goes through the same
history again and likely will not go further as where others were
already.

I started SPE because I needed a Python IDE which could run inside
Blender and Gimp. Unfortunately no editor was able to do that. I had a
little bit success by hacking their source code, but it turned out to
be such a hassle, I started writing my own lightweight editor, while
even learning Python and wxPython. During time SPE grew bigger and
bigger, got more community and developers and it went much further
than what I had in mind. Although this can be pleasing, it does not
really satisfy me. Something absurd is happening. A lot of users
request for example SVN integration. Why should I reinvent the wheel
if already some editors support it? Of course I could dive in their
code. That's not the point: even that is just simply a waste of time
and effort. SPE also might have some features like uml, realtime
updating sidebar without collapsing the explore tree or realtime
syntax error highlighting, which are not in (most) other open source
ide's. Why they should reinvent the wheel or dive in my code?

Python has a very active community full of energy, but a lot of it
could be even better used.

Purposes:
# fully cross-platform

Although this sounds evident, it is not obvious.

# build on good design pattern or Framework
Examples are:
- Dabo
- MVP
- MVC (ActiveGrid)
- ...
At least the UI code should be separated from the inner working, so
that ports to the various UI toolkits may be possible.

The code should be as much reusable as possible by creating api libraries
(not locking all code up in framework).

# minimal core + extensible with plugins

The core should be 100% stable, require only Python (preferably older
versions should work as well) and the UI toolkit (wxPython, Tkinter,
curses, ...), not memory or cpu consuming. Users can choose themselves
to (b)load it with plugins. This should be as user friendly as
possible.

I think it would be nice if there could be even a very minimal toolkit
which might be the base of an Python AJAX editor or who knows what
could be possible when Firefox 1.9
(http://wiki.mozilla.org/Roadmap_Scratchpad#Python_for_XUL) starts
supporting Python.

The plugins could range from some small code snippets to count words
to more advanced features, such as (eg from my own experience):
- uml view
- documentation view
- pychecker/pylint/pyflakes
- pylint code validation
- CVS/SVN integration
- todo lists
- syntax error highlighting
- web framework support
- TaskCoach plug-in
- debugger (eg seamless integration with WinPdb and/or others...)
- etc...

Extensions should be easy to install or uninstall for an end user like
in Firefox. Installation over the internet might be considered using
the egg technology.

# user = developper

The advantage of an IDE is that its users might turn into developers.
The blurring of this border should be encouraged as much as possible.
There could be a simplified framework to develop plugins.

So what is this email about? In my ideal scenario I would like if all
the IDE developers would gather together and discuss how we
could define our extensible framework and what is the core. Then we
could start developing a new IDE with a new name. (If everyone agrees
to use an existing IDE as a starting point, that is also fine.) As we
all have the know how it should go quite fast and even other
experienced wxPython programmers could speed it up, although in such
collaboration quality of code should be more important than speed. In
a worst case scenario I am even prepared to team up with the only one
other wxPython IDE developper (I know that dabo is a framework, but
please let me simplify) who thinks that this makes sense. But ideally
we would have a team in which during time some people enter and leave
but with a stable core.

The IDE could be tailored to different
users:from newbies, students to experienced developers.

I?m curious for feedback of the whole mailing list,  So whoever wants
to reply on this email: please don?t start a discussion about which
IDE is the best, etc... Or not about which features should be core or
plugins. I just gave examples, not a holy list. Let?s please use all
our efforts to put a team together for the next generation IDE...

(But I especially want the IDE developers to step forward, so these
last words are especially for them. As if no one of them reacts, this
proposal doesn't make sense.)

IDE developers, please say what you think. Why you would or would not
participate? And if it is a matter of not having time, please share
your knowledge. It is too precious to let it die. Of course there will
be a need of active developers. Say first if you are interested or
not. Think of the possibilities, it will be for sure more as you could
do alone. It would be a pity if this discussion would immediately
begin with a fight with which editor should be taken as a starting
point. I would be happy to leave SPE aside if I can fuel my experience
and some new ideas into a new project, which doesn't belong to me, but
to an enthusiastic team.

So I am in, who is next?

Stani

PS If you are not an IDE developer but would want to code, work on the
website, documentation, artwork, etc... Please step forward as well.
For those who are on PyCon, spread the word.

--
http://pythonide.stani.be
http://pythonide.stani.be/screenshots
http://pythonide.stani.be/manual/html/manual.html


--
http://pythonide.stani.be
http://pythonide.stani.be/screenshots
http://pythonide.stani.be/manual/html/manual.html