Best Python editor (under Linux)

[Harry George]

Steve Lamb <grey at despair.dmiyu.org> writes:

> On Thu, 02 Jan 2003 23:25:06 -0800, faust <urfaust at optushome.com.au> wrote:
> > Emacs is always the answer....
> 
>     Ah yes, Emacs.  Emacs is the proof that even the most die hard unix fan
> can succumb to creeping featurism.  Why?  Well think about it, "the unix way"
> is to have a collection of small tools which are interchangable, communicate
> with each other well and each do their specific task quite well.  "The windows
> way" is to lump every unrelated task into every program in an attempt to out
> check-box the competition on a comparisoon pamphlet.  Now, I ask you, which
> describes Emacs?  Clearly the latter.
> 
>     I never quite understood what a mail and news reader had to do with
> editing files yet every time the "best mail|news reader for unix" comes up
> gnus is top of the list.  Noone has yet to explain to me why I would want to
> install a 20+Mb editor just for a newsreader.  As a result I stick to slrn
> which calls my preferred editor (was joe, then jed, now vim).  Seems the
> sensible way to do things.  The reader calls the editor, not the editor
> contains the reader.
> 
>     Of course people have called Emacs a "work environment".  Fine.  When
> people ask for an editor don't reply with a "work environment".  Especially
> one where most of its die-hard fans will admit takes quite a bit of
> customization to even be moderately productive.  They asked for an editor, not
> a practical project to learn Lisp.
> 

Let's stay on topic, which is editing for python.  

I've trained up a dozen or so newbies on python over the last few
years.  I always offer them the option of their favorite editor.  We
get some vim, emacs, nedit, notepad, idle, jot, and others I can't
remember.  But when it gets serious, as in XP sessions (two people on
one keyboard), the emacs guys are far more productive.  As far as I
can tell, the vim guys are faster keystroke-by-keystroke, but the
emacs guys are more productive overall.  The notepad guys weren't
productive enough to be a fair sampling of the editor itself (they
weren't really programmers).  I haven't seen enough experienced idle
or scintilla people to have an opinion there.

It becomes obvious in those XP sessions what is happening, so people
from various editing backgrounds tend to end up in emacs.  BTW, none
of us writes emacs-lisp -- we just use vanilla installations on SGI
IRIX, IBM AIX, HP HPUX, SUN Solaris, MS Win95, MS WinNT, MS Win2K.

It is also my experience that newbies who don't have a strong
preference for an editor can learn to use emacs minimally at first,
using menu picks, and gradually add more features and shortcut
keystrokes as need arises.

I personally find emacs (with python-mode.el of course) is as
productive as I can think, so that's what I use.  Beyond that, I let
everyone pick his/her own editor.  As long as you are productive and
maintain the 4-spaces rule for tabs, we can work together.

> -- 
>          Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
>          ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
>     To email: Don't despair!   |  -- Lenny Nero, Strange Days
> -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------