[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

> Part of my thinking with the simple auto-squeeze formula, besides just 
> simplifying the code, it this.  Raymond claimed that squeezing slows down 
> printing.  If measurably true, one way to avoid a slow down would be to use a 
> simple heuristic formula to estimate the number of wrapped lines instead of 
> exactly counting.  This would be a separate issue, if needed.

After Raymond opened issue #35196, I checked and found several places where the 
auto-squeeze code was being inefficient.  There's a PR ready with those 
optimizations attached to that issue (GH-10454).

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

Tal, trying to understand your confused description of what behavior you want 
to fix required me to experiment and think.  There are at least 2 separate 
issues: triggering of auto-squeeze and lines reported (regardless of what 
triggers squeezing).  The following pair of experiments exhibits inconsistency 
in both respects.

>>> print('a'*3920) # Fills 49 80-char lines, correctly not squeezed.
...
>>> print('a'*3921)  # Wrapped to 50 lines, correctly auto squeezed.
[Squeezed text (50 lines).]  # Correct number when reporting wrapped lines.
>>> print('a'*3921+'\n')  # Ditto, but not auto-squeezed.
...
# Squeeze manually
[Squeezed text (1 line).]  # Different line count -- of output lines.
>>> print('a'*3920+'\na')  # Not initially squeezed, '2 lines'.

>From msg331784 it appears that you are more concerned here with auto squeeze 
>triggering than with line count.  Now that I think I know what you are trying 
>to fix, I can review the code change.

I agree to consider the ambiguity between output lines and display lines, and 
the effect on line count, later.

Part of my thinking with the simple auto-squeeze formula, besides just 
simplifying the code, it this.  Raymond claimed that squeezing slows down 
printing.  If measurably true, one way to avoid a slow down would be to use a 
simple heuristic formula to estimate the number of wrapped lines instead of 
exactly counting.  This would be a separate issue, if needed.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

Terry, I'm not sure I follow your thinking, but it feels like over-thinking.  
This is a simple bug with a simple fix.

Barring the current bug (which the attached PR fixes), the current logic counts 
lines, taking soft wrapping into account.  This was chosen to make things as 
simple as possible for the users, in terms of what's displayed on squeezed 
buttons and in terms of configuring auto-squeezing.  The fix is simple and with 
it Squeezer works quickly and consistently.

If you'd like to change the behavior, let's discuss that elsewhere.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

My suggest simple rule would sqeeze it.  With n = 50 and k = 75,

if len(s) > n*k or s.count('\n') > n: squeeze(s)

would squeeze at 3750.  With k = 50, as 2500.

I am not sure yet what to do about wrapping.  For development, a count of 
actual lines might be more helpful than a variable number of wrapped lines.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

My mistake on the reproduction; try: print('a'*1+'\n').  It does not 
trigger auto-squeezing, though this is an obvious case where it should be 
triggered.  (Manual squeezing also results in showing just 1 as the line count.)

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

There are 2 questions.  1. Should we review squeezer, in light of further 
complemplation and experience, and possibly patch it in a couple of weeks or 
so?  Yes.

2. Is there such a severe bug that we should possibly rush a fix and ask Ned to 
cherry-pick something after the well announced deadline?  Since I see behavior 
different from your report, I don't currently see a reason to ask.

I have tested with Windows 3.7.1 64 bit installed, Windows 3.7.2c1+ 32 bit 
repository debug build from yesterday, Mac 3.7.2rc1 64 bit installed.

'a'*200 and 'a'*200 + '\n' both display over 3 lines and are *not* 
autosqueezed.  Both squeeze as 3 lines.  Unsqueeze, narrow window, and 
resqueeze, and the result is *4* lines, not 3.  Line single lines with 2 
and 20002 characters, a'*2 and 400 * (48*'a'+'\n),  are autosqueezed, as 
more than 250 lines, depending on the window width.  Note interactive echo uses 
repr(), so that the '\n' converted to 1 newline is converted back to '\n'.  
Lines here also depends on width.

print(200 * (70*'a'+'\n')) is squeezed as 200 lines regardless of wrapping or 
not.   So the effect of wrapping on line count depends on the number of lines.

print(40 * (100*'a'+'\n')) (4000 chars) is not squeezed, even though it would 
be by the 50 lines * 75 chars/line (3750 chars) rule I suggested.  

Further experiments shows that autosqueezing only applies to single writes to 
sys.stdout (and maybe to sys.stderr).  print(40 * (100*'a'+'\n'), 40 * 
(100*'a'+'\n')) prints 40 lines twice with separate write calls and is not 
autosqueezed.  Manual squeeze squeezes contiguous  stdout or stderr blocks even 
if the former is the result of more than one print arg or calls.  Stdout blocks 
separated by an input() response are autosqueezed separately.  This all seems 
fine.  The doc could use a few more words.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

Note the lack of newline at the end; that triggers the problematic path in the 
current calculation.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

As I mentioned when opening this issue: 'a'*200 (or 'a'*1).

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

In the example I gave on the PR, 200 70 char lines, the squeezed box says 200 
lines with or without line wrapping (before the patch).

What is a simple case that you think is buggy?

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

Squeezer currently does take wrapping into account, i.e. it does take IDLE's 
"soft" line wrapping into account when counting lines. Therefore the 
auto-squeeze criterion of "at least X lines" does lead to auto-squeezing for 
any mixture of very long lines and/or many short lines.

However, there is currently a bug in the line counting mechanism which is 
causing it to not count long, soft-wrapped lines properly in some cases. This 
issue is about that bug, and the PR fixes it. Merging this fix should result in 
the originally intended behavior, which is similar to what Terry described in 
his last comment here.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

Note that I *am* considering ...

It seems that a reasonable rule might be to squeeze if n lines or the 
equivalent of n full lines (75 chars each) in total characters.  In other 
words, if lines >= N or chars >= to 75*N: squeeze().  Do we have a rule not to 
squeeze fewer but longer lines?

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

Changing the width of the window changes the number of visible lines because of 
line wrapping.  But it does not change the number of logical lines.  My 
understanding is that squeezer currently reports the latter, and that is not 
necessarily a bug.  Not that I am considering replacing line wrapping with a 
horizontal scrollbar.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Terry J. Reedy]

Change by Terry J. Reedy :


--
versions:  -Python 3.6

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Tal Einat  added the comment:

See PR GH-10449 with a fix.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

Change by Tal Einat :


--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +9724
stage:  -> patch review

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue35208] IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width

[Tal Einat]

New submission from Tal Einat :

Squeezing a single long line with a newline, e.g. 'a'*200, results in "Squeezed 
text (1 lines)".

Also, changing the width of the window (even to very small widths) doesn't 
affect the number of lines reported when squeezing (when squeezing *after* the 
width change).

--
assignee: terry.reedy
components: IDLE
messages: 329600
nosy: taleinat, terry.reedy
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: IDLE: Squeezed lines count ignores window width
type: behavior
versions: Python 3.6, Python 3.7, Python 3.8

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com