end of print = lower productivity ?

[Lie Ryan]

On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 17:51 -0600, Tim Chase wrote:
> >> It's not so much "ridiculous" as a failure of your editor to
> >> assist you.  In Vim (my editor-of-choice), I'd do something
> >> like
> > 
> > seriously, I don't think anyone in Windows uses vim
> 
> Are you just guessing, or do you have any sort of facts to
> back this up?  It's my editor of choice when I'm stuck in
> Windows, and as a long-time member of the vim mailing list,
> there's a pretty even split between platforms.  Vim (and
> similarly Emacs) has the additional benefits that I have the
> same environment no matter what platform I'm on, and it's
> usable over a ssh connection.

I know vim is available in windows, but I know nobody but those that
comes from unix-like world that use vim instead of Notepad, Notepad2,
Notepad++, NoteTab, Programmer's Notepad, and multitude other Windows
text editors/Notepad replacement.

For a proof, let's see what Google has to say about this: "Windows text
editor". Vim is on page 3, near the turning point where nobody is
talking about text-editor anymore and more about text-editor reviews.
Even worse is Emacs, on page 6, after many other popular text-editors
have been mentioned several times.

> > Since when is python becoming exclusive community for 
> > Linux/Unix-like/Cygwin users that Windows users who have 
> > nothing but Notepad is put aside.
> 
> Never has been, nor will be.  Python only requires a text
> editor.  If typing a few extra parens for "print"ing is the
> worst of your efficiency concerns in Notepad, you need to go
> out and see what productivity-enhancing features other
> text-editors offer.  On Win32, you *can* write Python code
> using Notepad, Wordpad, edit.exe or edlin.exe all from a
> virgin install.  However, you can use *any* text-editor you
> want, whether vim, emacs, Eclipse, WingIDE, Komodo, or any
> of a multitude of others.  If you develop on/for multiple
> platforms, it helps to choose a cross-platform editor.  I
> wouldn't consider *any* of the stock Win32 editors even
> remotely capable of long-term functionality (regardless of
> py2.6 vs py3k), so downloading another editor is almost a
> given -- whether that's vim, emacs, Eclipse, or whatever.

I live amongst many Windows users and I was a Windows user (note the
past tense). In the Windows world, when the operating system ships with
a half-decent program, the way most people would go is to live with it
(which is why everyone uses IE6 instead of installing a multitude of
better alternative browsers). IDLE is installed with default Windows
python installation because practically nobody cares to search for
better text editors (IDLE is not perfect, but it is much better than
Notepad). 

> > I, for instance, hates when my text editors tries to be 
> > smarter than me.
> [snip]
> >> Net gain:  5 characters in old-Python and 6 characters in 
> >> new-Python ;-)
> > 
> > Is that supposed to be a joke?
> 
> Keystroke golf is no more a joke than your obstinate
> insistence against "smart editors" (i.e. "editors you can
> configure to behave the way you want and make your life
> easier").

I have nothing against smart editors, as long as it doesn't outsmart me.
I like syntax editing, since it gives visual cues to things. But I hate
autocompletion, since it takes control out of me. I much prefer it
highlights the unclosed pair[1], and let me fix it myself. I like
(though never missed) the so-called IntelliSense or omnicompletion since
it only gives suggestions, instead of outsmarting me to complete what
I'm typing without my permission. I like Firefox's default
autocompletion which gives list of urls in a dropdown box, instead of
replacing what I'm writing for the same reason.

[1] but not popping error message like Visual Basic 6

Unix philosophy: Worse is better. Small is beautiful. KISS -- Keep It
Simple and Stupid.

Python's Zen: Simple is better than complex. Complex is better than
complicated.

And "less is more". ;)

> Unless mandated by your job, use what makes you most
> productive -- whether that's the programming language, the
> version of the programming language, the operating system,
> office furniture, music selection, or your text-editor/IDE.
> 
> So when the language gives you newfound powers (ability to
> redefine "print") at the cost of something a good editor
> will readily expropriate, if you have problems, it's a
> failure of your editor, not the language.

I don't hate print-as-function, but when someone hates smart-ass editors
as much as me coupled with their hate of print-function's use of more
shift-key, they'll hate print-as-function with a reason and no possible
fix. I am explaining their viewpoints.