[IPython-dev] connecting ipythonqt to an existing kernel should not require specifying 4 ports

Robert Kern robert.kern at gmail.com
Thu Sep 9 19:10:21 EDT 2010

On 9/9/10 5:58 PM, MinRK wrote:
> Hello,
> In order to connect a second ipythonqt frontend to an existing kernel, I must
> specify by hand all 4 ports at the command-line.  This really shouldn't be the
> case, especially since the default behavior is to have the ports ordered
> sequentially.
> I think it should at least be able to try using consecutive ports when a single
> port is given, or use a two-stage connection model that doesn't require clients
> to ever know more than one port, as is done in the parallel code.
> Having to type 'ipythonqt -e --xreq 65273 --sub 65274 --rep 65275 --hb 65276',
> as I just had to, just doesn't make sense.

I like the two-stage connection model; you open and advertise one REQ/REP port 
for configuring clients with the other ports.

Hopefully, 0MQ will grow the ability to share multiple named sockets on a single 
TCP/IP port, but they've only briefly discussed it so far.

Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
  that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
  an underlying truth."
   -- Umberto Eco

More information about the IPython-dev mailing list