On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 at 06:47PM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote: > On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:46:03 PM UTC-7, Tom wrote: > > > > +1 to .file.py, since it'll hide the file from directory listings. > > I'm not sure I want to hide the file. I don't actually use xxx.sage files > much, but when I do, I usually just delete the py file right away, and if > it's hidden, that's harder to do. I think of hidden files as ones that I > don't want to see but I want to keep for a while, not temporary files like > these preparsed ones. Do people like to keep the preparsed ones around for > a while?
I agree here -- I really prefer programs to not create hidden files unnecessarily. > Another option: should we by default delete the preparsed file automatically > after using it? That is, if you do "sage file.sage", then > "file_preparsed.py" (or something like that) would be created, then fed into > sage-python, and then deleted at the end. If you wanted to keep the file, > you could run "sage -preparse file.sage" on its own. > > Or I suppose we could store the preparsed files in ~/.sage/preparsed/, with > filenames modified to reflect the full path of the original file (so you can > have different files "script.sage" in several different directories, and the > preparser will create different .py files for each one). These seem reasonable -- especially putting things in ~/.sage/preparsed. (Or maybe ~/.sage/tmp/preparsed). > > > while You are at it: > > > preparsed_FILE.py or even simply .FILE.py would make tab completion > > > happy. (who has not accidentally edited FILE.py instead of FILE.sage > > > more than once?) > > > I can see your point, but there is also virtue in having the preparsed file > listed alphabetically next to the original file. I'd also prefer to have preparsed files listed next to the originals. Dan -- --- Dan Drake ----- http://mathsci.kaist.ac.kr/~drake -------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
