[Idle-dev] IDLE's save-before-run requirement

[Kurt B. Kaiser]

Wesley Chun <wesc@deirdre.org> writes:

GvR wrote  to WChun:
> > The problem is that IDLE development has virtually come to a halt -- I
> > just can't find the time to work on it, and there are other good
> > development environments available.  I have some ideas for reworking
> > the whole save/run machinery, but no code; and I have working code
> > that runs the program in a subprocess, but there's a security issue
> > that makes me hesitant to check it in...
> >
> > I wouldn't create a PEP for IDLE -- just discuss your ideas on
> > idle-sig.  Maybe enough people are interested to get me coding
> > again, or to get someone else to volunteer...

It's great to see some activity on the list again, it almost died out the last
few months!

I agree with the others; IDLE is a very useful IDE for Python which has a
unique set of features compared to other solutions:

1. Open souce
2. Under ultimate control of GvR.
3. Portable via Tkinter.
4. Very usable by relatively inexperienced people.
5. Has a Python debugger.
6. Understands Python syntax and environment.
7. Provides an extended example of Python programming.
8. Distributed with all versions of Python at very reasonable cost,
   so available to first time, casual, or resource limited users.

I'm sure the others on this list can think of further advantages!

IMHO IDLE should remain at roughly the (apparent) level of complexity it's at
(or less?) to avoid reducing its usability for beginning/intermediate
programmers.  And there are some things which can be done to further improve
usability and reliability, IMHO, like running the target code in a separate
process.

I hope we can encourage Guido to continue to share his IDLE thoughts ( ;-)
with us, either via code or design direction!

Regards, KBK