[Fwd: [Idle-dev] idle development && run script]

[entropia]

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 <entropiamax@jazzfree.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [es] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: es
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Guido van Rossum <guido@beopen.com>
CC: Peter Schneider-Kamp <nowonder@nowonder.de>,
 	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--