From nowonder@nowonder.de Wed Aug 9 16:39:57 2000 From: nowonder@nowonder.de (Peter Schneider-Kamp) Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:39:57 +0000 Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script Message-ID: <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> Hi! I have recently become interested in idle because I need a decent python ide for some programming workshops. The people are either newbies or have experience with Borland's Turbo Pascal IDE. Now that I am evaluating idle for this task I have come across some "issues". The most annoying is to have to save every time before running a script. I have hacked this for my version so that it tries to save before attempting to run (and throws an errorbox only in case the save does not succeed). It works fine (at least for my purposes), but there is a comment on the top of getfilename in ScriptBinding.py saying "Better logic would offer to save!". I disagree with this. What are the current plans for idle development? Peter P.S.: from disclaimer import StdDisclaimer t = """I am new to idle-dev, so please don't kill me if I ask tremendously stupid questions repeating things that have been discussed a thousand times a thousand years ago.""" d = StdDisclaimer(text = t) d.print() -- Peter Schneider-Kamp ++47-7388-7331 Herman Krags veg 51-11 mailto:peter@schneider-kamp.de N-7050 Trondheim http://schneider-kamp.de From guido@beopen.com Thu Aug 10 00:02:20 2000 From: guido@beopen.com (Guido van Rossum) Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:02:20 -0500 Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Aug 2000 15:39:57 GMT." <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> References: <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> Message-ID: <200008092302.SAA25015@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> > I have recently become interested in idle because I need a > decent python ide for some programming workshops. The people > are either newbies or have experience with Borland's > Turbo Pascal IDE. > > Now that I am evaluating idle for this task I have come > across some "issues". The most annoying is to have to > save every time before running a script. I have hacked this > for my version so that it tries to save before attempting > to run (and throws an errorbox only in case the save does > not succeed). > > It works fine (at least for my purposes), but there is > a comment on the top of getfilename in ScriptBinding.py > saying "Better logic would offer to save!". I disagree > with this. > > What are the current plans for idle development? Not much -- we've got so much else to do that we're waiting for 2.0 to be complete before we get back to IDLE (probably). In the mean time, I agree with you that this area of IDLE needs a lot of improvement. I have some ideas (with Jeremy) for completely revamping this part of IDLE, which involve running the program in a separate process altogether (the only way to get everything to work right). This would require a lot of restructuring, and the code you are patching would probably disappear completely... I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) From nowonder@nowonder.de Thu Aug 10 07:03:09 2000 From: nowonder@nowonder.de (Peter Schneider-Kamp) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 06:03:09 +0000 Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script References: <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> <200008092302.SAA25015@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> Message-ID: <3992459D.14CFDBA3@nowonder.de> Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Not much -- we've got so much else to do that we're waiting for 2.0 to > be complete before we get back to IDLE (probably). > > In the mean time, I agree with you that this area of IDLE needs a lot > of improvement. I have some ideas (with Jeremy) for completely > revamping this part of IDLE, which involve running the program in a > separate process altogether (the only way to get everything to work > right). This would require a lot of restructuring, and the code you > are patching would probably disappear completely... Well, I am certainly willing to help with that restructuring. If you (or Jeremy) could give me a few more hints what the ideas look like, I might adopt them pre-2.0 (an improved idle would not hurt the 2.0 release <0.1 wink>). > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. Okay, then there should be an *option* where you can switch between those behaviours. For the sake of your sanity it could be set to *ask user* on default (the other options being *just save* and *just complain*). Peter -- Peter Schneider-Kamp ++47-7388-7331 Herman Krags veg 51-11 mailto:peter@schneider-kamp.de N-7050 Trondheim http://schneider-kamp.de From entropiamax@jazzfree.com Thu Aug 10 07:47:34 2000 From: entropiamax@jazzfree.com (entropia) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:47:34 +0200 Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script References: <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> <200008092302.SAA25015@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> Message-ID: <39925006.3A735FA@jazzfree.com> Guido van Rossum escribió: > > I have recently become interested in idle because I need a > > decent python ide for some programming workshops. The people > > are either newbies or have experience with Borland's > > Turbo Pascal IDE. > > > > Now that I am evaluating idle for this task I have come > > across some "issues". The most annoying is to have to > > save every time before running a script. I have hacked this > > for my version so that it tries to save before attempting > > to run (and throws an errorbox only in case the save does > > not succeed). > > > > It works fine (at least for my purposes), but there is > > a comment on the top of getfilename in ScriptBinding.py > > saying "Better logic would offer to save!". I disagree > > with this. > > > > What are the current plans for idle development? > > Not much -- we've got so much else to do that we're waiting for 2.0 to > be complete before we get back to IDLE (probably). > > In the mean time, I agree with you that this area of IDLE needs a lot > of improvement. I have some ideas (with Jeremy) for completely > revamping this part of IDLE, which involve running the program in a > separate process altogether (the only way to get everything to work > right). This would require a lot of restructuring, and the code you > are patching would probably disappear completely... > > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. The solution is to save the original file in a .bak extension file. When idle closes restores the original file. Now, you work with the modified file but only saves if you want. > > > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) > > _______________________________________________ > IDLE-dev mailing list > IDLE-dev@python.org > http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev From entropiamax@jazzfree.com Thu Aug 10 07:55:54 2000 From: entropiamax@jazzfree.com (entropia) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:55:54 +0200 Subject: [Fwd: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script] Message-ID: <399251F9.A3CBDAE@jazzfree.com> Este es un mensaje multipartes en formato MIME. --------------32563A31B6E6B205AD1C4928 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --------------32563A31B6E6B205AD1C4928 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <39925006.3A735FA@jazzfree.com> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:47:34 +0200 From: entropia X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [es] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: es MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Guido van Rossum CC: Peter Schneider-Kamp , idle-dev@python.org Subject: Re: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script References: <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> <200008092302.SAA25015@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Guido van Rossum escribió: > > I have recently become interested in idle because I need a > > decent python ide for some programming workshops. The people > > are either newbies or have experience with Borland's > > Turbo Pascal IDE. > > > > Now that I am evaluating idle for this task I have come > > across some "issues". The most annoying is to have to > > save every time before running a script. I have hacked this > > for my version so that it tries to save before attempting > > to run (and throws an errorbox only in case the save does > > not succeed). > > > > It works fine (at least for my purposes), but there is > > a comment on the top of getfilename in ScriptBinding.py > > saying "Better logic would offer to save!". I disagree > > with this. > > > > What are the current plans for idle development? > > Not much -- we've got so much else to do that we're waiting for 2.0 to > be complete before we get back to IDLE (probably). > > In the mean time, I agree with you that this area of IDLE needs a lot > of improvement. I have some ideas (with Jeremy) for completely > revamping this part of IDLE, which involve running the program in a > separate process altogether (the only way to get everything to work > right). This would require a lot of restructuring, and the code you > are patching would probably disappear completely... > > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. The solution is to save the original file in a .bak extension file. When idle closes restores the original file. Now, you work with the modified file but only saves if you want. > > > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) > > _______________________________________________ > IDLE-dev mailing list > IDLE-dev@python.org > http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev --------------32563A31B6E6B205AD1C4928-- From guido@beopen.com Thu Aug 10 14:30:47 2000 From: guido@beopen.com (Guido van Rossum) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:30:47 -0500 Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Aug 2000 08:47:34 +0200." <39925006.3A735FA@jazzfree.com> References: <39917B4D.E1FBFA6D@nowonder.de> <200008092302.SAA25015@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> <39925006.3A735FA@jazzfree.com> Message-ID: <200008101330.IAA28153@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> > > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. > > The solution is to save the original file in a .bak extension file. When > idle closes restores the original file. Now, you work with the modified > file but only saves if you want. And what if IDLE crashes when you are running the program? No good! I would be ok with a mod that save the new contents in a .new extension file and uses that. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) From ken@kenkinder.com Thu Aug 10 18:17:33 2000 From: ken@kenkinder.com (Ken Kinder) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:17:33 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script In-Reply-To: <200008092302.SAA25015@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> Message-ID: How about saving a temporary file somewhere else or prompting for a save right there? -- Ken Kinder www.kenkinder.com On Wed, 9 Aug 2000, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I have recently become interested in idle because I need a > > decent python ide for some programming workshops. The people > > are either newbies or have experience with Borland's > > Turbo Pascal IDE. > > > > Now that I am evaluating idle for this task I have come > > across some "issues". The most annoying is to have to > > save every time before running a script. I have hacked this > > for my version so that it tries to save before attempting > > to run (and throws an errorbox only in case the save does > > not succeed). > > > > It works fine (at least for my purposes), but there is > > a comment on the top of getfilename in ScriptBinding.py > > saying "Better logic would offer to save!". I disagree > > with this. > > > > What are the current plans for idle development? > > Not much -- we've got so much else to do that we're waiting for 2.0 to > be complete before we get back to IDLE (probably). > > In the mean time, I agree with you that this area of IDLE needs a lot > of improvement. I have some ideas (with Jeremy) for completely > revamping this part of IDLE, which involve running the program in a > separate process altogether (the only way to get everything to work > right). This would require a lot of restructuring, and the code you > are patching would probably disappear completely... > > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. > > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) > > _______________________________________________ > IDLE-dev mailing list > IDLE-dev@python.org > http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev > From bas@andrew.cmu.edu Thu Aug 10 18:45:43 2000 From: bas@andrew.cmu.edu (Bruce Sherwood) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:45:43 -0400 Subject: [Idle-dev] Separate process; automatic save for a run Message-ID: <3842469416.965915143@muon> Guido said: > In the mean time, I agree with you that this area of IDLE needs a lot > of improvement. I have some ideas (with Jeremy) for completely > revamping this part of IDLE, which involve running the program in a > separate process altogether (the only way to get everything to work > right). This would require a lot of restructuring, and the code you > are patching would probably disappear completely... > > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. Note that David Scherer has already formally submitted changes for IDLE so that your program does run in a separate process. Some of us have been using this version for many months with great pleasure; it is included in the VPython package (which offers easy real-time 3D output from Python). See http://cil.andrew.cmu.edu/projects/visual Another important feature of Scherer's version of IDLE is that you just press F5 and the file is automatically saved and run (in a separate process). This is a different protocol than I have used in other programming environments, but I find that I like it a LOT in practice. Asking the user whether to save is very intrusive by comparison. I do agree that it would be even better for the default save to go to something.new, and upon closing the file the user could be asked whether to copy something.new to something.py. (Obviously with the current protocol I make a backup copy before doing extensive editing.) I can say that I really hated the old IDLE protocol of asking me about saving every time I wanted to run. Scherer's change made a huge improvement in interactivity. Bruce Sherwood From guido@beopen.com Thu Aug 10 19:52:05 2000 From: guido@beopen.com (Guido van Rossum) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:52:05 -0500 Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:17:33 CST." References: Message-ID: <200008101852.NAA29217@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> > How about saving a temporary file somewhere else or prompting for a save > right there? Prompting for a save right there is what I had in mind originally, but I understand that Peter didn't want that... If I'm wrong, that's of course the solution. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) From dscherer@milliway.kssacct.com Thu Aug 10 15:56:30 2000 From: dscherer@milliway.kssacct.com (David Scherer) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:56:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Idle-dev] Separate process; automatic save for a run In-Reply-To: <3842469416.965915143@muon> Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Bruce Sherwood wrote: > Guido said: > > > I'm not sure what to do about your proposed patch, but I do want to > > say that I am *against* saving without asking the user. ... > Another important feature of Scherer's version of IDLE is that you just > press F5 and the file is automatically saved and run (in a separate > process). This is a different protocol than I have used in other > programming environments, but I find that I like it a LOT in practice. > Asking the user whether to save is very intrusive by comparison. I do agree > that it would be even better for the default save to go to something.new, > and upon closing the file the user could be asked whether to copy > something.new to something.py. (Obviously with the current protocol I make > a backup copy before doing extensive editing.) I think the ideal behavior is: 1) The files being edited are only overwritten with the explicit consent of the user. 2) The program always executes *as though* the user had saved all buffers. If the user's script imports a module which is being edited, the editor buffer needs to be used instead of the file on disk. 3) A single keystroke suffices to run a program. One way to implement this is with ".new" files. Another, which makes a lot of sense in a multiple-process model, is to pass the buffers directly to the loader program through the control channel (a socket in my design). In either case, import needs to be hooked to get the right version of modules. Dave From bas@andrew.cmu.edu Thu Aug 10 20:27:37 2000 From: bas@andrew.cmu.edu (Bruce Sherwood) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:27:37 -0400 Subject: [Idle-dev] More on saving files Message-ID: <3848582917.965921257@muon> David Scherer said: > 2) The program always executes *as though* the user had saved all buffers. > If the user's script imports a module which is being edited, the editor > buffer needs to be used instead of the file on disk. > > 3) A single keystroke suffices to run a program. > > One way to implement this is with ".new" files. Another, which makes a > lot of sense in a multiple-process model, is to pass the buffers directly > to the loader program through the control channel (a socket in my design). > In either case, import needs to be hooked to get the right version of > modules. You're right about the desirability of this "as though" behavior, including the edit buffers for any modules that I happen to have open at the moment. However, just sending the edit buffers to the loader program wouldn't do everything that I like so much about your current version of IDLE, namely that whenever I run I know for sure that my most recent edits have been saved permanently to disk and don't reside solely in memory buffers. I have come to really appreciate the sense of security that comes from knowing that this successful run corresponds to the program on disk. I want the combination of saving to ".new" with passing the edit buffers to the loader. Bruce Sherwood From guido@beopen.com Thu Aug 10 21:31:24 2000 From: guido@beopen.com (Guido van Rossum) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:31:24 -0500 Subject: [Idle-dev] Separate process; automatic save for a run In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:56:30 GMT." References: Message-ID: <200008102031.PAA29887@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> > I think the ideal behavior is: > > 1) The files being edited are only overwritten with the explicit > consent of the user. > > 2) The program always executes *as though* the user had saved all buffers. > If the user's script imports a module which is being edited, the editor > buffer needs to be used instead of the file on disk. > > 3) A single keystroke suffices to run a program. > > One way to implement this is with ".new" files. Another, which makes a > lot of sense in a multiple-process model, is to pass the buffers directly > to the loader program through the control channel (a socket in my design). > In either case, import needs to be hooked to get the right version of > modules. Yes. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) From guido@beopen.com Thu Aug 10 21:43:25 2000 From: guido@beopen.com (Guido van Rossum) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:43:25 -0500 Subject: [Idle-dev] More on saving files In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:27:37 -0400." <3848582917.965921257@muon> References: <3848582917.965921257@muon> Message-ID: <200008102043.PAA29966@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> > You're right about the desirability of this "as though" behavior, including > the edit buffers for any modules that I happen to have open at the moment. > However, just sending the edit buffers to the loader program wouldn't do > everything that I like so much about your current version of IDLE, namely > that whenever I run I know for sure that my most recent edits have been > saved permanently to disk and don't reside solely in memory buffers. I have > come to really appreciate the sense of security that comes from knowing > that this successful run corresponds to the program on disk. I want the > combination of saving to ".new" with passing the edit buffers to the loader. What happened to the idea of producing a (temporary?) fork of IDLE at SourceForge to get more people to work on these things? I can't offer to participate, but I don't want to stifle development either! --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) From dscherer@milliway.kssacct.com Thu Aug 10 18:43:03 2000 From: dscherer@milliway.kssacct.com (David Scherer) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 17:43:03 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Idle-dev] More on saving files In-Reply-To: <200008102043.PAA29966@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Guido van Rossum wrote: > What happened to the idea of producing a (temporary?) fork of IDLE at > SourceForge to get more people to work on these things? > > I can't offer to participate, but I don't want to stifle development > either! As I recall, I made the suggestion and you volunteered me to do it :) Unfortunately, I didn't have the spare cycles at the time. I've started the process of creating a sourceforge project, and I'll upload my version of IDLE into CVS once it exists. However, I don't currently have time to do much work on IDLE either, so I hope other people are interested in being developers. I will give anyone who asks developer or admin access. Dave From vi@ippe.obninsk.ru Sat Aug 12 15:33:07 2000 From: vi@ippe.obninsk.ru (Valerie Ivanov) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2000 18:33:07 +0400 Subject: [Idle-dev] How can I see Cyrillic comment's line from my *.py by IDLE 0.6? Message-ID: <39956022.67C6AFC1@ippe.obninsk.ru> Hi Pythoners, I have some problem concerning with output in IDLE 0.6 non-english char's. Using previous version (IDLE 0.5) one can toggle in Window's version font's family: text['font'] = ("courier new", 10) and it works OK. But new advanced version (0.6) of IDLE have unicode support (It is great!) and have loss old useful feature, or haven't? I can't find anything in doc's about supporting other fonts, i.e. Cyrillic (Windows-1251). Can anyone to help me solve this problem? Best regards. Thank for any comments, Valerie Ivanov PS If I use PythonWin, then this font's ambiguity doesn't take place. :-) From neilh@scintilla.org Sun Aug 13 02:22:21 2000 From: neilh@scintilla.org (Neil Hodgson) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 11:22:21 +1000 Subject: [Idle-dev] How can I see Cyrillic comment's line from my *.py by IDLE 0.6? References: <39956022.67C6AFC1@ippe.obninsk.ru> Message-ID: <015001c004c4$f0276a70$8119fea9@neil> > But new advanced version (0.6) of IDLE have unicode support (It is > great!) and have loss old useful feature, or haven't? > I can't find anything in doc's about supporting other fonts, i.e. > Cyrillic (Windows-1251). > Can anyone to help me solve this problem? Doesn't look like its a font problem. IDLE 0.6 is quite happy to display Cyrillic characters encoded in UTF-8. You should be able to copy from PythonWin and see the characters. There is a problem with entering Cyrillic characters as the key strokes are interpreted using a European code page. Typing the "q" (\161) character on a US keyboard into IDLE in Russian mode inserts "é" (\351) whereas its "й" (\320\271), in PythonWin. > PS If I use PythonWin, then this font's ambiguity doesn't take place. > :-) I'm afraid PythonWin's support for various character sets has its own set of confusions. Neil From ken@kenkinder.com Mon Aug 14 18:17:04 2000 From: ken@kenkinder.com (Ken Kinder) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 11:17:04 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script In-Reply-To: <200008101852.NAA29217@cj20424-a.reston1.va.home.com> Message-ID: The only major problem that comes to my mind is the possiblity of it messing up people's paths. It would certainly need to be a temporary file in the same directory as the the real version, or modify the path of the running program. Could I suggest having it in an config file? -- Ken Kinder www.kenkinder.com On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > How about saving a temporary file somewhere else or prompting for a save > > right there? > > Prompting for a save right there is what I had in mind originally, but > I understand that Peter didn't want that... If I'm wrong, that's of > course the solution. > > --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.pythonlabs.com/~guido/) > From dscherer@cmu.edu Tue Aug 15 02:35:29 2000 From: dscherer@cmu.edu (David Scherer) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 21:35:29 -0400 Subject: [Idle-dev] More on saving files In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I wrote: > I've started the process of creating a sourceforge project, and I'll > upload my version of IDLE into CVS once it exists. However, I don't > currently have time to do much work on IDLE either, so I hope other people > are interested in being developers. I will give anyone who asks developer > or admin access. I've done this: http://sourceforge.net/projects/idlefork I made Peter and Guido admins (Peter because he asked, Guido because he might someday want to take it back). I assume that idle-dev is still the right place to discuss development. idle/ in cvs contains my modified version of IDLE, pulled out of the VPython 0.2 installer for Windows. Someone (Peter?) may want to spend some time configuring or disabling all the sourceforge features, submitting a description, releasing a tarball, etc. Enjoy, Dave From nowonder@nowonder.de Tue Aug 15 16:32:50 2000 From: nowonder@nowonder.de (Peter Schneider-Kamp) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 15:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Idle-dev] IDLE development - Call for participation Message-ID: <399962A2.D53A048F@nowonder.de> To (hopefully) speed up the devlopment of IDLE a temporary fork has been created as a seperate project at SourceForge: http://idlefork.sourceforge.net http://sourceforge.net/projects/idlefork The CVS version represents the enhanced IDLE version sed by David Scherer in his VPython. Besides other improvements this version executes threads in a seperate process. The spanish inquisition invites everybody interested in IDLE (and not keen to participate in any witch trials) to contribute to the project. Any kind of contribution (discussion of new features, bug reports, patches) will be appreciated. If we can get the new IDLE version stable and Python's benevolent dictator for life blesses our lines of code, the improved IDLE may go back into Python's source tree proper. at-least-it'll-be-part-of-Py3K--ly y'rs Peter P.S.: You do not have to be a member of the Flying Circus. P.P.S.: There is no Spanish inquisition <0.5 wink>! -- Peter Schneider-Kamp ++47-7388-7331 Herman Krags veg 51-11 mailto:peter@schneider-kamp.de N-7050 Trondheim http://schneider-kamp.de From boyle5@llnl.gov Tue Aug 15 21:58:00 2000 From: boyle5@llnl.gov (Jim Boyle) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:58:00 -0700 Subject: [Idle-dev] idleFork 0.7 tgz file Message-ID: For what it's worth: I downloaded the tarred/gzipped idlefork-0.7 file and found the AutoExpand.py file to be hosed. It would appear that something bad (tm) happened in the tarring up. I tried the download twice just to be sure. Jim From nowonder@nowonder.de Wed Aug 16 13:41:36 2000 From: nowonder@nowonder.de (Peter Schneider-Kamp) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:41:36 +0000 Subject: [Idle-dev] idleFork 0.7 tgz file References: Message-ID: <399A8C00.CFBFDF8F@nowonder.de> Jim Boyle wrote: > > I downloaded the tarred/gzipped idlefork-0.7 file and found the > AutoExpand.py file > to be hosed. It would appear that something bad (tm) happened in the > tarring up. Actually the version I checked out was in some way (I don't pretend to understand) corrupted. idlefork-0.7.1.tar.gz should correct this. and-the-release-management-at-sourceforge-should-be- shot-and-replaced-by-some-way-of-referring-to-the- anonymous-ftp-space---at-least-in-my-humble-opinion-ly y'rs Peter -- Peter Schneider-Kamp ++47-7388-7331 Herman Krags veg 51-11 mailto:peter@schneider-kamp.de N-7050 Trondheim http://schneider-kamp.de