[Idle-dev] Deprecate running IDLE without a subprocess

[Roger Serwy]

 From what I've read in this thread, Linux, Mac, and Windows all seem to 
fully support the subprocess without issue.

Should I open an issue on the bug tracker for deprecating "-n" ?



On 06/24/2012 05:32 AM, Tal Einat wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:54 AM, serwy <roger.serwy at gmail.com 
> <mailto:roger.serwy at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     IDLE developers,
>
>     In the interest of simplifying IDLE's code, I suggest that running
>     IDLE *without* a subprocess  be deprecated. Since 2009, IDLE could
>     have multiple instances running while using a subprocess. See
>     http://bugs.python.org/ issue1529142
>     <http://bugs.python.org/issue1529142>
>
>     Running without a subprocess has a flaw in that Ctrl+C from the
>     IDLE GUI can not be used to stop a program. This can be irritating
>     to Python beginners if an accidental infinite loop arises and the
>     user's only recourse is to restart IDLE, losing any unsaved work
>     in the editor windows.
>
>     What are your thoughts?
>
>
> IIRC, the major reason for keeping around no-subprocess mode was 
> because IDLE always used the same port for communicating with its 
> subprocess. Therefore, running more than one instance of IDLE at the 
> same time would never work, and even closing IDLE and running it again 
> quickly would sometimes fail. This is no longer an issue since IDLE 
> now uses a random port given by the OS (by opening the socket on TCP 
> port zero - it took me years to discover that trick!).
>
> Other reasons for keeping no-subprocess mode around:
> * debugging IDLE is significantly easier when everything is in a 
> single process
> * some firewall software would occasionally block the connection to 
> the subprocess, or perhaps just raise a warning (but I guess this is 
> no longer a real issue; the old firewall warning message has been removed)
>
> In my opinion, if the IDLE developers are confident in their ability 
> to debug IDLE running with a sub-process, then there is no significant 
> reason not to remove the no-subprocess mode. From what I remember 
> about the code, this would allow simplifying things significantly in 
> many places.
>
> - Tal Einat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/idle-dev/attachments/20120711/8a6d91d1/attachment.html>