On 18/05/2021 06:22, Terry Reedy wrote: >> 2) The inability to paste code from web sites into IDLE (you >> have to do it one line at a time and wait for the >> interspersed results. This is, of course, due to the >> interpreter in the shell, not really an IDLE issue but >> complete beginners don't understand that. > > In IDLE Shell, one can paste a *statement* rather than just a line. > History recall also recalls statements rather than lines.
I think the problem stems from folks following web tutorials. They see a function definition and grab it and paste it. But if the code includes blank lines the interpreter gets confused and spits out errors. >> The old VAX >> debugger used to be able to do that by simply prefixing >> everything with a comment marker when saving and then >> interpreting lines beginning with comment+prompt (#DBG>) > > I have a separate idea about using the debugger to 'animate' a program > -- step through at a user controllable speed. To be fair beginners tend not to mess with the debugger so don't have any requirements. My reference to the VAX was purely its ability to save a session and replay it. (We used to create a lot of white-box test scripts that way!) >> 4) The ability to copy/paste code (without the prompts) >> into a file (either a project or a web post/email request) >> while retaining formatting. > > What does 'retaining formatting' mean? Mostly the indentation I guess. In other words I write a bit of code comprising multiple statements in the interactive shell. I then want to copy all of that into a file I'm creating, but don't want the prompts (or output) in my file, but I do want the indentation to be consistent after the prompts are removed. (Hmm, that's getting very close to an agile user story!) >> 5) Tabbed edit windows (already in IdleX). > > Tabbed windows, with not just editors on tabs, was one of my initial > goals 11 years ago, along with using ttk widgets (done). Other things, > including a bit of opposition, keep intervening. I will increment its > priority. > > After Roger Sewey, IdleX author, got the commit bit, at my suggestion, > he fixed about 10 issues in a few months, and then disappeared and quit > contributing. Shame. I wondered why I hadn't seen any new IdleX releases recently. >> 6) How to pass command line arguments when running a program. >> (Yes, it's possible, but not intuitive to a beginner, >> but much better than before) > > There is nothing 'intuitive' about running an editor window as if the > corresponding file had been run from a command line. What we did is > give people a partial command line for the part that comes after 'python > -i <filename>'. Should we say that on the form? Yes, and i have no problem with the current implementation (athough being able to add python interpreter arguments too would be nice. But beginners probably wouldn't care. One issue is the current menu option is not obvious: "Run...Customized" does not scream "add arguments" it sounds like some way to modify the interpreter or somesuch. In fact, this might be where to add the interpreter options. "Run with arguments" might be a more obvious spelling. Anyways, I'm happy to see any and all progress on IDLE and I hope my musings are of some use. -- Alan G Author of the Learn to Program web site http://www.alan-g.me.uk/ http://www.amazon.com/author/alan_gauld Follow my photo-blog on Flickr at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/alangauldphotos _______________________________________________ IDLE-dev mailing list IDLE-dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/idle-dev
