Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #72180 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-28 14:23 -0500 |
| Last post | 2014-05-31 09:28 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 324 — 57 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Python 3 is killing Python Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 14:23 -0500
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2014-05-28 21:39 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-28 22:41 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 12:49 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2014-05-28 14:58 -0500
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-29 03:49 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 21:23 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2014-05-29 06:38 -0500
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-05-29 06:15 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-05-28 21:24 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-05-28 23:14 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-14 15:12 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2014-07-14 23:37 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-07-14 23:47 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-14 18:00 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 11:18 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 09:28 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-14 18:54 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 12:11 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-14 21:18 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 14:40 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Martin S <shieldfire@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 06:31 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-15 05:41 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Tim Roberts <timr@probo.com> - 2014-07-16 20:18 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 22:15 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-07-17 17:36 +1200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 15:45 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 15:45 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 08:05 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-07-15 12:30 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 00:59 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-07-15 12:19 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-07-15 15:50 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-07-15 17:38 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-07-15 18:23 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 16:35 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-05-29 08:38 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-28 16:22 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python beliavsky@aol.com - 2014-08-06 06:47 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-08-06 14:42 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-07 12:42 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-07 13:37 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-08-07 21:07 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-05-28 21:57 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2014-05-31 12:07 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2014-05-31 13:09 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2014-05-31 13:22 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2014-06-01 04:57 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 13:35 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 21:11 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2014-06-01 13:38 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2014-06-01 07:01 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-06-01 07:52 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2014-06-01 13:41 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-06-01 12:53 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-06-01 17:21 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2014-06-02 07:14 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-05-31 12:30 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-05-31 08:48 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:01 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-06-02 16:15 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-06-02 12:21 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-06-03 02:30 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-06-02 16:52 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2014-06-02 19:16 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 11:53 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-06-02 18:59 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-06-02 23:12 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 23:30 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-06-03 09:03 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-06-03 07:22 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-07-14 21:58 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-07-15 00:23 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 08:31 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-07-14 21:47 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 14:20 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Fabien <fabien.maussion@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 14:17 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 23:00 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2014-07-15 09:57 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 00:31 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-15 20:38 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-15 19:06 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-15 23:01 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-16 03:51 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 14:20 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-16 07:33 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 08:52 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 16:26 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 09:44 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 16:50 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-07-16 00:11 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-16 07:49 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 18:44 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-16 11:35 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 21:54 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 13:46 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-16 12:10 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 22:55 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-07-16 06:10 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 16:11 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-07-16 06:22 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 00:04 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 17:39 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 01:23 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 18:48 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 02:07 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-16 19:20 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 02:51 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 13:15 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-07-17 12:27 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-07-17 07:18 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 07:49 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-07-30 14:31 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-16 17:02 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-16 18:47 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-07-16 16:27 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 15:41 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-17 00:00 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 18:16 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 03:14 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-17 08:17 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 12:49 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 20:34 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-07-18 14:17 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 13:20 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-17 23:54 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 03:16 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 21:47 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Fabien <fabien.maussion@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 12:12 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 21:12 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 11:15 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 04:27 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-17 21:44 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 19:24 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 12:39 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 21:40 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-18 08:24 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 08:34 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-07-18 14:19 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 08:35 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Torsten Bronger <bronger@physik.rwth-aachen.de> - 2014-07-18 17:25 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-18 19:45 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-17 20:06 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2014-07-17 12:22 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-17 21:37 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-17 17:30 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-17 20:13 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-18 18:38 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 01:26 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 12:54 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Andrew Berg <aberg010@my.hennepintech.edu> - 2014-07-17 19:45 -0500
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 13:01 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 16:45 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 12:15 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 20:37 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 15:34 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 02:21 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 18:27 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-07-18 16:46 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 16:49 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 16:50 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 17:22 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-18 21:27 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-18 21:21 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-19 09:29 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 02:41 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-19 12:00 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-19 13:39 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 09:13 +1000
Improving Idle (was Re: Python 3 ...) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-19 16:45 -0400
Re: Improving Idle (was Re: Python 3 ...) Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-19 18:31 -0700
Re: Improving Idle (was Re: Python 3 ...) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 11:42 +1000
Re: Improving Idle (was Re: Python 3 ...) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-20 12:40 +0100
Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-20 17:52 -0400
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 18:22 -0700
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-21 11:32 +1000
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-20 23:49 -0400
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-21 10:55 +1000
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-20 23:28 -0400
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-21 13:34 +1000
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-21 05:00 -0400
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-07-21 13:00 -0700
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-21 20:56 +1000
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-21 14:30 -0400
Re: Idle's Shell: prompts and indents (was ...) Idle users please read Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-22 04:35 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-19 15:50 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-19 19:23 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 09:10 +1000
Re: Improving Idle (was Re: Python 3 ...) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-21 02:54 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 08:24 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-18 18:20 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-18 19:31 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-07-18 20:44 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 14:37 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-07-18 18:09 -0400
Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-19 07:28 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] "C.D. Reimer" <chris@cdreimer.com> - 2014-07-19 11:08 -0700
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-19 14:31 -0400
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-20 01:23 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 11:39 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] "C.D. Reimer" <chris@cdreimer.com> - 2014-07-19 18:53 -0700
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] CHIN Dihedral <dihedral88888@gmail.com> - 2014-07-21 08:37 -0700
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 14:18 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 07:50 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 09:19 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2014-07-20 10:41 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] "C.D. Reimer" <chris@cdreimer.com> - 2014-07-19 18:24 -0700
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] TP <wingusr@gmail.com> - 2014-07-19 19:03 -0700
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] "C.D. Reimer" <chris@cdreimer.com> - 2014-07-19 20:10 -0700
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-01 13:10 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-01 21:22 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-01 15:19 +0300
Re: Python and IDEs Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-01 22:30 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-01 23:10 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-01 23:30 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-01 18:13 +0300
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-06 14:38 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-06 22:51 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-11 11:08 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> - 2014-08-01 15:28 +0100
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-06 14:47 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-07 13:32 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-11 11:08 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-08-11 09:37 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-11 20:20 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-08-11 14:45 +0100
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-08-11 18:42 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-12 10:11 +1000
Re: Quoting and attribution (was: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python]) Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-08-11 19:27 -0500
Re: Quoting and attribution (was: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python]) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-12 02:07 +0000
Re: Quoting and attribution (was: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python]) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-12 12:13 +1000
Re: Quoting and attribution (was: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python]) Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-08-11 21:23 -0500
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-13 12:42 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-13 23:35 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-08-13 16:51 +0100
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-02 00:39 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-02 11:14 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-02 09:50 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de> - 2014-08-02 09:10 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-02 23:38 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Dietmar Schwertberger <maillist@schwertberger.de> - 2014-08-01 19:16 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-06 14:47 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-08-11 18:39 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> - 2014-08-13 13:46 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-08-01 14:22 -0600
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-08-01 22:09 +0100
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-02 12:00 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-02 10:20 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-02 23:33 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-02 23:01 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-03 12:01 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-03 11:12 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-08-02 14:55 +0100
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-03 12:04 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Dietmar Schwertberger <maillist@schwertberger.de> - 2014-08-03 09:46 +0200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-08-02 10:27 -0400
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-08-03 12:20 +1200
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-02 09:48 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2014-08-05 13:29 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-06 02:50 +1000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2014-08-05 19:25 +0000
Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] TP <wingusr@gmail.com> - 2014-08-05 14:28 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-07-18 19:26 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2014-08-03 21:21 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 01:18 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Javier <nospam@nospam.com> - 2014-07-16 17:33 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 11:50 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 03:33 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 04:25 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python "Neil D. Cerutti" <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2014-07-16 11:48 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-16 18:34 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-07-17 08:31 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 16:41 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python "Frank Millman" <frank@chagford.com> - 2014-07-17 09:09 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 17:59 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Glenn Linderman <v+python@g.nevcal.com> - 2014-08-01 23:18 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 21:24 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 13:47 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Abhiram R <abhi.darkness@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 03:07 +0530
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-16 02:08 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Abhiram R <abhi.darkness@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 03:05 +0530
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 22:49 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Abhiram R <abhi.darkness@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 03:43 +0530
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2014-07-15 18:30 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Abhiram R <abhi.darkness@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 04:10 +0530
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 16:53 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-07-16 02:57 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Tim Roberts <timr@probo.com> - 2014-07-16 20:20 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 13:38 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Abhiram R <abhi.darkness@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 09:07 +0530
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-16 09:18 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris “Kwpolska” Warrick <kwpolska@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 12:20 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-07-17 14:17 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Joshua Landau <joshua@landau.ws> - 2014-07-16 00:45 +0100
Interleaved posting style for text discussion forums (was: Python 3 is killing Python) Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-07-17 14:02 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 23:38 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2014-07-15 20:43 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-07-15 23:05 -0400
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-07-16 13:59 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 11:01 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-15 21:08 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-15 18:57 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-07-15 22:49 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-15 18:53 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 13:20 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 14:46 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-15 12:53 -0600
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2014-07-15 17:02 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-07-15 15:43 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-07-15 16:44 +0100
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-16 01:48 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 15:48 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-17 07:03 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 10:36 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 03:52 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-07-17 11:38 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-07-18 04:48 +1000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-18 18:01 +0000
Re: Python 3 is killing Python wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-07-15 06:33 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2014-06-01 05:00 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-31 15:44 +0300
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2014-06-01 05:05 +0200
Re: Python 3 is killing Python pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2014-07-12 10:50 -0700
Re: Python 3 is killing Python Deb Wyatt <codemonkey@inbox.com> - 2014-05-31 09:28 -0800
Page 13 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 17 Next page →
| From | Dietmar Schwertberger <maillist@schwertberger.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-01 19:16 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12521.1406913421.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75462 |
Am 01.08.2014 13:10, schrieb Wolfgang Keller:
> Because on such operating systems, each and every application is an
> entirely self-contained package that doesn't need any "packages" or
> "installers" to use it.
For people who have never used such a system it's probably difficult to see
the advantages.
Besides the easy installation, backup and replication of software the
RISC OS
way also had the advantage that you were able to organize your
applications in folders just like other folders and files.
There was no need for separate File and Program managers.
MS never got this right. Instead, they tried to fix things later with the
start menu and finally the box to type the software name to start it ...
One effect was that under DOS/Windows people usually saved their
documents in folders per application whereas under RISC OS they
were usually grouped by content/project.
When it came to usability, RISC OS had many advantages over the
other systems, e.g.
- real drag'n'drop for loading *and* saving of files/selections
- drag'n'drop also for transfer between applications
- a standard vector graphics format that all applications supported
(and for which an application was provided by default with the OS)
- good font display (still better than e.g. MS Windows today)
- three mouse buttons for select/menu/adjust
- no menu bars
- the icon bar for running applications, drives, shares and other
resources
- consistent, orthogonal & logical user interfaces instead of assistants
and wizards for each and every task
- complete programmers reference manual
Regards,
Dietmar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-06 14:47 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <20140806144717.8847deb8b0bea888b89d814b@gmx.net> |
| In reply to | #75495 |
> > Because on such operating systems, each and every application is an > > entirely self-contained package that doesn't need any "packages" or > > "installers" to use it. > For people who have never used such a system it's probably difficult > to see the advantages. That's the whole point. The problem is that the ones who "decide" (well, they pretend to, but actually can't, because they don't know the alternatives) are always people who are "not even clueless". I.e. they are totally clueless, *and* psychotically self-convinced of their omnicompetence. Sincerely, Wolfgang
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-11 18:39 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <lsb2l0$p0s$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #75797 |
On 2014-08-06, Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> wrote:
>> > Because on such operating systems, each and every application is an
>> > entirely self-contained package that doesn't need any "packages" or
>> > "installers" to use it.
>
>> For people who have never used such a system it's probably difficult
>> to see the advantages.
>
> That's the whole point.
>
> The problem is that the ones who "decide" (well, they pretend to, but
> actually can't, because they don't know the alternatives) are always
> people who are "not even clueless".
Ha! I love it. I presume that's an allusion to that-other-Wolfgang's
apocryphal "not even wrong" comment. :)
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I want to mail a
at bronzed artichoke to
gmail.com Nicaragua!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-13 13:46 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <20140813134645.7363574988e5474acdfa162d@gmx.net> |
| In reply to | #76066 |
> >> > Because on such operating systems, each and every application is > >> > an entirely self-contained package that doesn't need any > >> > "packages" or "installers" to use it. > > > >> For people who have never used such a system it's probably > >> difficult to see the advantages. > > > > That's the whole point. > > > > The problem is that the ones who "decide" (well, they pretend to, > > but actually can't, because they don't know the alternatives) are > > always people who are "not even clueless". > > Ha! I love it. I presume that's an allusion to that-other-Wolfgang's > apocryphal "not even wrong" comment. :) Exactly. And it's also an allusion to that statement that "knowledge means to know what you don't know". Sincerely, Wolfgang
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-01 14:22 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12522.1406924551.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75462 |
On 08/01/2014 08:39 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > The installer has basically three choices. > 1) Install libnettle inside the application directory > 2) Install libnettle to some system library directory > 3) Don't install libnettle, and demand that someone else (perhaps the > user, or the system package manager) install it. > > Option 1 results in duplications. (Unless one application is allowed > to access a library in another application's directory, which is a > HORRIBLE mess.) Option 2 is exactly what you're complaining about, > scattering files all over the FS. And option 3 is what package > managers are for. What are you advocating? Option 1 also is a huge security hole. A prime example of this was the so-called heartbleed bug. In such a model, each app that distributes openssl in the app bundle has to be updated or it is at risk. This turns out to be a huge vulnerability.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-01 22:09 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12524.1406927358.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75462 |
On 2014-08-01 18:16, Dietmar Schwertberger wrote: > Am 01.08.2014 13:10, schrieb Wolfgang Keller: >> Because on such operating systems, each and every application is an >> entirely self-contained package that doesn't need any "packages" or >> "installers" to use it. > For people who have never used such a system it's probably difficult to see > the advantages. > > Besides the easy installation, backup and replication of software the > RISC OS > way also had the advantage that you were able to organize your > applications in folders just like other folders and files. > There was no need for separate File and Program managers. > MS never got this right. Instead, they tried to fix things later with the > start menu and finally the box to type the software name to start it ... > > One effect was that under DOS/Windows people usually saved their > documents in folders per application whereas under RISC OS they > were usually grouped by content/project. > > > When it came to usability, RISC OS had many advantages over the > other systems, e.g. > - real drag'n'drop for loading *and* saving of files/selections > - drag'n'drop also for transfer between applications > - a standard vector graphics format that all applications supported > (and for which an application was provided by default with the OS) > - good font display (still better than e.g. MS Windows today) > - three mouse buttons for select/menu/adjust > - no menu bars > - the icon bar for running applications, drives, shares and other > resources > - consistent, orthogonal & logical user interfaces instead of assistants > and wizards for each and every task > - complete programmers reference manual > I'd heard people say how user-friendly Apple Macs were, but when I got to use one I was somewhat disappointed. When opening files, it used old-fashioned dialog boxes like RISC OS's precursor from several years earlier. In RISC OS, if I had a directory window open, I could save to it with a simple drag-and-drop, but in MacOS, even if I had a directory window open, I had to navigate to the directory in the Save dialog. (OK, not quite true, because of a 3rd-party extension called "Click There It Is".) And don't mention the menu bar across the top, separated from the window to which it belonged. Or the way that clicking on any window of an application or the Finder brought not only it but also all of the its siblings to the front. On RISC OS, windows came to the front only when *I* wanted them to.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 12:00 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <c42o1nFbrqdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #75500 |
MRAB wrote: > I'd heard people say how user-friendly Apple Macs were, but when I got > to use one I was somewhat disappointed. Well, they were compared to MS-DOS and the like, which was all that was within reach of the general public when the first Mac appeared. RISCOS came along somewhat later. > in MacOS, even if I had a directory window open, I had to navigate to the > directory in the Save dialog. Yes, that was annoying. It wasn't a problem to begin with, because the original Mac was strictly single-tasking -- you couldn't *have* a directory window and an application open at the same time. And all your files were on floppies in a flat file system -- folders only existed in the Finder's imagination -- so the only real choice to be made when saving a file was "which disk do I put it on". When multitasking, hard disks and hierarchical file systems came along, there was an opportunity for a rethink, but it never really happened. Things are somewhat better in MacOSX, where you can drag a folder from a Finder window onto a file dialog to take you there, but there is still more of a distinction between Finder windows and save dialogs than there needs to be. > And don't mention the menu bar across the top, separated from the > window to which it belonged. That seems to be a matter of taste. There are some advantages to the menu-bar-at-top model. It's an easier target to hit, because you can just flick the mouse up to the top. It only takes up space once, instead of once per window. It makes it possible for an app to be running without having any windows, and still be able to interact with it. > Or the way that clicking on any window of an application or the Finder > brought not only it but also all of the its siblings to the front. MacOSX has fixed that one, thankfully. Only the window you click comes to the front, now. -- Greg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 10:20 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12530.1406938858.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75508 |
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > MRAB wrote: >> in MacOS, even if I had a directory window open, I had to navigate to the >> directory in the Save dialog. > > Yes, that was annoying. It wasn't a problem to begin with, > because the original Mac was strictly single-tasking -- > you couldn't *have* a directory window and an application > open at the same time. And all your files were on floppies > in a flat file system -- folders only existed in the > Finder's imagination -- so the only real choice to be > made when saving a file was "which disk do I put it on". Okay, so it was like DOS 1.0... > When multitasking, hard disks and hierarchical file > systems came along, there was an opportunity for a > rethink, but it never really happened. ... and it didn't get improved when it grew directories like DOS 2.0 did. It's like how the default DOS prompt is actually $N$G when $P$G is a lot more useful, except that changing the default prompt is pretty easy and applies globally (not to mention that you might well want to enhance the prompt beyond just $P$G). >> And don't mention the menu bar across the top, separated from the >> window to which it belonged. > > That seems to be a matter of taste. There are some > advantages to the menu-bar-at-top model. It's an easier > target to hit, because you can just flick the mouse up > to the top. It only takes up space once, instead of > once per window. It makes it possible for an app to > be running without having any windows, and still be > able to interact with it. Downside: It separates (graphically and logically) a window from its menu bar. The "easier target for the mouse" argument is valuable ONLY when you use the mouse to access the menu bar. If you use the keyboard (and take advantage of mnemonic letters), it's much more useful to have the menu bar attached to its window. In the rare case of an app that runs without any windows, incidentally, how do you tell the system that you want that app's menu bar instead of (say) Finder, which comes up when you click on the desktop? ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 23:33 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <c440jnFjipdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #75509 |
Chris Angelico wrote: > The "easier target for the mouse" argument is valuable ONLY > when you use the mouse to access the menu bar. If you use the keyboard > (and take advantage of mnemonic letters), it's much more useful to > have the menu bar attached to its window. Seems to me that if you use the keyboard for everything, it doesn't matter where the menu bar is. Unless you're talking about the way you can use the keyboard to make menus drop down in Windows... but that's not the way Mac menu shortcuts work. The menu doesn't visually drop down when you invoke a Mac menu command with the keyboard. > In the rare case of an app > that runs without any windows, incidentally, how do you tell the > system that you want that app's menu bar instead of (say) Finder, > which comes up when you click on the desktop? In classic MacOS, there was a menu of running applications in the top right corner. In MacOSX, you click on the app's icon in the dock. Also, while completely windowless applications might be rare, it's not rare for an app to have some commands that pertain to the app itself, and not to any particular window, e.g. "New". It's more logical for those to appear in a user interface element that's not tied to a window. -- Greg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 23:01 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12542.1406984465.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75529 |
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:33 PM, Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> The "easier target for the mouse" argument is valuable ONLY >> when you use the mouse to access the menu bar. If you use the keyboard >> (and take advantage of mnemonic letters), it's much more useful to >> have the menu bar attached to its window. > > > Seems to me that if you use the keyboard for everything, > it doesn't matter where the menu bar is. Unless you're > talking about the way you can use the keyboard to make > menus drop down in Windows... but that's not the way > Mac menu shortcuts work. The menu doesn't visually drop > down when you invoke a Mac menu command with the keyboard. There are two forms of shortcut key. One is a direct-action keystroke that immediately does the same thing that you can do using the menus (say, Ctrl-O is the same as File... Open). With those, the menu is completely unnecessary, except as a list of available keystrokes; it could just as easily be a help screen that says "Press Ctrl-O to open a file", so the menu's actual location is quite arbitrary. Downside: There's only so many keystrokes available, and not all of them have memorable meanings. It's usually best to keep this to the few most common functions (opening a file, yes, but not "reinterpret this file as ISO-8859-3", unless you make that configurable per user). But the other form, usually described as menu mnemonics, is where you press Alt-F to bring up the _File menu, and then O to activate _Open. (In OS/2, those would be ~File and ~Open; in GTK, the mnemonic is preceded by an underscore. Windows 3.1 used an ampersand, and I believe Win32 does the same thing. It's a little awkward when you have an invoicing screen and you put something like "P&O Shipping" as your customer name, and suddenly Alt-O takes you someplace different. The tilde has the advantage that it doesn't often come up accidentally; the underscore makes sense because the mnemonic is underlined; I have no idea why an ampersand should be used. But I digress.) When you work this way, you aren't grabbing the mouse, so the advantage of not needing to aim so carefully doesn't exist; but if the menu comes up right near where your eyes are already focused, you need to move _them_ less distance - and that means you can focus on the menu more quickly, plus it emphasizes that the visual change (opening the menu) occurred in your current program, not in something else. In Xfce, I can press Alt-F1 to open up the main Applications Menu. That's at the top of the screen (in fact, top left corner), so it gets the "throw the mouse" benefit; I think I use the mouse with that a lot more often than I use the mouse with a program's own menu, because there's more likely to be something unusual in there. If I install a new piece of software, I have to figure out where it's landed in the menu; but Gypsum's four menus aren't changing unexpectedly, so I'm happy using Alt-O, V to open up Advanced Options. >> In the rare case of an app >> that runs without any windows, incidentally, how do you tell the >> system that you want that app's menu bar instead of (say) Finder, >> which comes up when you click on the desktop? > > In classic MacOS, there was a menu of running applications > in the top right corner. In MacOSX, you click on the app's > icon in the dock. Okay. So you need to first click on something in the dock - that's the thing down the bottom of the screen, right? - and then go all the way up to the top of the screen to use its menu bar. I think I'd much rather have a popup menu - right-click the program's dock icon and get the menu right there where the mouse already is. Oh wait, that requires people to understand more than a single mouse button, so it's contrary to Mac philosophy :) > Also, while completely windowless applications might be > rare, it's not rare for an app to have some commands that > pertain to the app itself, and not to any particular > window, e.g. "New". It's more logical for those to appear > in a user interface element that's not tied to a window. Sure, but those elements are usually rare enough that they can be stuck on the window anyway. Audacity has a "New" that opens up a new window, and it's slightly surprising the first couple of times, but after that you get used to it. It's not a big enough issue to warrant a change of UI. It is an issue, yes, but I wouldn't warp anything around it any more than I'd warp my UI around the possibility of a user having no screen or keyboard and is using the mouse blind. Sure it happens (I've done it, and I know what I could code to make it easier!), but not often. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-03 12:01 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <c45cdvFsfc2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #75533 |
Chris Angelico wrote: > It's a little awkward when you have > an invoicing screen and you put something like "P&O Shipping" as your > customer name, and suddenly Alt-O takes you someplace different. An app that did that would be seriously broken, wouldn't it? The & should only be interpreted that way in menu items, etc., not in user data. > but if the menu comes up > right near where your eyes are already focused, you need to move > _them_ less distance But putting the menu bar at the top of the window doesn't guarantee that it will be near where your eyes are. If you have a window taking up most of the screen and you're editing something near the bottom, a menu bar at the top of the window is nearly as far away as one at the top of the screen. It would make more sense to pop the menu up near the text cursor. There's no law that says a menu summoned by keystroke has to appear in the same place as one summoned by mouse. In any case, when you use a shortcut sequence, do you really *look* at the menu that comes up, or do you just memorise the appropriate alt-sequence? If you use it frequently, I suspect the latter. If you don't use it very often, having to look away doesn't matter so much. > Okay. So you need to first click on something in the dock - that's the > thing down the bottom of the screen, right? - and then go all the way > up to the top of the screen to use its menu bar. Because of the "throw the mouse" effect, going *all* the way to the top takes a tiny fraction of a second and is almost effortless. Going any lesser distance takes *much* longer. > I think I'd much > rather have a popup menu - right-click the program's dock icon and get > the menu right there where the mouse already is. Dock icons do have a contextual menu, but it's just a menu of windows. Fitting all of the app's menus in there would require hierarchical menus, which are an abomination you don't want to get me started on. :-) > Oh wait, that > requires people to understand more than a single mouse button, so it's > contrary to Mac philosophy :) The Mac philosophy on that seems to be widely misunderstood. Having only one button on my mouse doesn't mean there's only one thing I can do with it. I can shift-click, option- click, command-click, and nowadays control-click, plus any combination of those. That's enough for anyone to keep in their head, I would have thought. There's also one concrete advantage to using modifiers instead of extra mouse buttons: you can provide feedback by changing the cursor when a modifier is held down. -- Greg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-03 11:12 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12564.1407028771.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75566 |
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> It's a little awkward when you have >> an invoicing screen and you put something like "P&O Shipping" as your >> customer name, and suddenly Alt-O takes you someplace different. > > > An app that did that would be seriously broken, wouldn't it? > The & should only be interpreted that way in menu items, etc., > not in user data. Mnemonics can also be used on text labels, and then they apply to the adjacent field - for instance, you could have "_Name" followed by an entry field for the Name, and hitting Alt-N will take you to that field. The app I'm talking about used a label to show the customer's name, and we had exactly that issue (although more often with couples' names - for instance, if we had an order from John and Mary Smith, but didn't know their full names, we'd identify them as J&M Smith, and voila, Alt-M would take us to... whatever field came after the display of the name (which was the address). To be quite honest, that particular program was a lot more broken than that. But still, it did drive home the value of using ~ instead of & for that job. And of course, _ makes enough sense that we can accept its potential for collisions. (Plus it's usually possible to disable underscore interpretation. Or, more properly, you have to explicitly enable their interpretation; in GTK, I have to call set_use_underline(1) before it'll create a mnemonic.) >> but if the menu comes up >> right near where your eyes are already focused, you need to move >> _them_ less distance > > > But putting the menu bar at the top of the window doesn't > guarantee that it will be near where your eyes are. If > you have a window taking up most of the screen and you're > editing something near the bottom, a menu bar at the top > of the window is nearly as far away as one at the top of > the screen. Putting it at the top of the window cannot possibly make it further away than putting it at the top of the screen. It's potentially going to be a lot closer, but at its worst, it'll be just as bad (modulo the title bar's height). > It would make more sense to pop the menu up near the text > cursor. There's no law that says a menu summoned by > keystroke has to appear in the same place as one summoned > by mouse. Sure. And I know of plenty of applications where that's possible. The standard used to be Shift-F10 to bring up a context menu, identical to right-clicking the mouse except that the menu appears at the object you're working on rather than at the mouse's location. These days, you often get something like that on the Menu key (aka the other Windows key, on some keyboards); same result. But that's a context menu, not the pull-down menu; although it's common to have the same menu items on them. > In any case, when you use a shortcut sequence, do you > really *look* at the menu that comes up, or do you just > memorise the appropriate alt-sequence? If you use it > frequently, I suspect the latter. If you don't use it > very often, having to look away doesn't matter so much. If I'm using "Alt-F, O" as a command keystroke, then sure, it doesn't make any difference where the menu is. But often I'll pull down a menu, then look at it to figure out what I want to hit. Once my eye has found it, I'll press its underlined letter, so I still don't use the mouse; but I do need it to have a mnemonic, and I need the entire menu to be near my eye. >> Okay. So you need to first click on something in the dock - that's the >> thing down the bottom of the screen, right? - and then go all the way >> up to the top of the screen to use its menu bar. > > Because of the "throw the mouse" effect, going *all* the > way to the top takes a tiny fraction of a second and is > almost effortless. Going any lesser distance takes > *much* longer. Right, but it still takes time. Also, if your mouse is set fast enough to go all the way from the bottom to the top of the screen in less than 0.1s, then either your screen is fairly small (may have been true in the past, but is getting pretty rare now), or you seriously penalize any going-less-distance operations. In fact, it becomes self-perpetuating: if you set the mouse fast, it becomes really important to use the edges and avoid the middle, and if applications always use the edges and never the middle, it's really important to set your mouse faster. Conversely, slower mouse settings mean it's easier to be precise with interior movements, while reducing the advantage of the borders. But no matter how fast you set the mouse, it still takes a nonzero time to move it to a specific position. The absolute easiest place to reach is... where you already are. Put the menu there! That's what popup menus are for. >> I think I'd much >> rather have a popup menu - right-click the program's dock icon and get >> the menu right there where the mouse already is. > > Dock icons do have a contextual menu, but it's just a > menu of windows. Fitting all of the app's menus in there > would require hierarchical menus, which are an abomination > you don't want to get me started on. :-) I detest window stacking. Each window stands alone, even if some are from the same application. (Either that, or some of them are to be altogether hidden. But anything that gets shown should be shown at top level.) >> Oh wait, that >> requires people to understand more than a single mouse button, so it's >> contrary to Mac philosophy :) > > > The Mac philosophy on that seems to be widely misunderstood. > Having only one button on my mouse doesn't mean there's > only one thing I can do with it. I can shift-click, option- > click, command-click, and nowadays control-click, plus any > combination of those. That's enough for anyone to keep in > their head, I would have thought. I can do all those, AND I can do those with right-click. And bare right-click has the advantage that it can be done one-handed; that can be quite a difference when you have a son/daughter/brother/sister hanging off your left arm... > There's also one concrete advantage to using modifiers > instead of extra mouse buttons: you can provide feedback > by changing the cursor when a modifier is held down. Sure. But that shouldn't preclude the use of additional mouse buttons too. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 14:55 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12543.1406987723.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75508 |
On 2014-08-02 01:00, Gregory Ewing wrote: > MRAB wrote: [snip] >> And don't mention the menu bar across the top, separated from the >> window to which it belonged. > > That seems to be a matter of taste. There are some advantages to the > menu-bar-at-top model. It's an easier target to hit, because you can > just flick the mouse up to the top. It only takes up space once, > instead of once per window. It makes it possible for an app to be > running without having any windows, and still be able to interact > with it. > RISC OS didn't have a menu bar at the top of each window either; its menus were all pop-up. You didn't have to keep flicking the mouse at all!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-03 12:04 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <c45cl5FsgjqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #75534 |
MRAB wrote: > RISC OS didn't have a menu bar at the top of each window either; its > menus were all pop-up. You didn't have to keep flicking the mouse at > all! The main reason for having a menu bar is discoverability. The idea is that you can browse through the menus and get a feel for what commands are potentially available to you. That's not so easy to do when everything is hidden in contextual menus. -- Greg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dietmar Schwertberger <maillist@schwertberger.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-03 09:46 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12595.1407095182.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75567 |
Am 03.08.2014 02:04, schrieb Gregory Ewing: > MRAB wrote: >> RISC OS didn't have a menu bar at the top of each window either; its >> menus were all pop-up. You didn't have to keep flicking the mouse at >> all! > The main reason for having a menu bar is discoverability. The > idea is that you can browse through the menus and get a feel > for what commands are potentially available to you. That's not > so easy to do when everything is hidden in contextual menus. This was not a problem with the RISC OS menu concept. Only some menu items were depending on the mouse position. Actually the menu items were easier to discover as the non-applicable items were not hidden but greyed out. Regards, Dietmar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 10:27 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <roy-429277.10270202082014@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #75508 |
In article <c42o1nFbrqdU1@mid.individual.net>, Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > > And don't mention the menu bar across the top, separated from the > > window to which it belonged. > > That seems to be a matter of taste. There are some > advantages to the menu-bar-at-top model. It's an easier > target to hit, because you can just flick the mouse up > to the top. It only takes up space once, instead of > once per window. It makes it possible for an app to > be running without having any windows, and still be > able to interact with it. In the old days, we had really small screens (the original Mac had a 9 inch screen with 512 x 342 resolution). Most application windows filled most of the screen, so there really wasn't much difference between per-desktop and per-window menu bars. These days, I'm running multiple 24 inch monitors. The single menu bar paradigm starts to break down in an environment like that. I find I tend to put the few windows I'm actively using near the top of my primary screen (the one with the menu bar), and use the second screen to hold windows I'm not interacting with much.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-03 12:20 +1200 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <c45dhqFsltjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #75535 |
Roy Smith wrote: > These days, I'm running multiple 24 inch monitors. The single menu bar > paradigm starts to break down in an environment like that. Yes, that's an issue. However, even on a large screen, most of my windows are at least half a screen high, putting their tops a considerable distance from where I'm working. And the targeting effect means that a target at the top of the screen is still easier to hit than one half way up. Multiple screens are a problem. Probably what should happen is for the menu bar to move to the screen holding the currently active window, instead of being tied to one "primary" screen. -- Greg
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-02 09:48 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <mailman.12527.1406936904.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #75462 |
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> wrote: > On 08/01/2014 08:39 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> The installer has basically three choices. >> 1) Install libnettle inside the application directory >> 2) Install libnettle to some system library directory >> 3) Don't install libnettle, and demand that someone else (perhaps the >> user, or the system package manager) install it. >> >> Option 1 results in duplications. (Unless one application is allowed >> to access a library in another application's directory, which is a >> HORRIBLE mess.) Option 2 is exactly what you're complaining about, >> scattering files all over the FS. And option 3 is what package >> managers are for. What are you advocating? > > Option 1 also is a huge security hole. A prime example of this was the > so-called heartbleed bug. In such a model, each app that distributes > openssl in the app bundle has to be updated or it is at risk. This > turns out to be a huge vulnerability. More generally, that's exactly what Steven said about needing every package to update before you can confidently say it's updated. But that's also the greatest feature of the first option: you can't break this application by upgrading that library, because only upgrading the application (which hopefully will have been tested by the author) will upgrade the library it uses. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-05 13:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <XnsA38092737136Aduncanbooth@127.0.0.1> |
| In reply to | #74796 |
Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: > Unfortunately, software development on Windows is something of a > ghetto, compared to the wide range of free tools available for Linux. > Outside of a few oases like Microsoft's own commercial development > tools, it's hard to do development on Windows. Hard, but not > impossible, of course, and there are quite a few resources available > for the Windows user willing to download installers from the Internet. > For Python users, the IDEs from Wingware and Activestate are notable: > > https://wingware.com/ > http://komodoide.com/ > > > I missed this thread when it started, so please forgive me if this has been covered, but by dismissing Microsoft you look to have skipped over a very powerful Python IDE for Windows, namely PTVS. Microsoft's PTVS is Windows only :-( and completely free (gratuit), partly free (libre): PTVS itself is Apache licensed and the required Visual Studio is of course closed source but PTVS now runs on the latest free versions of Visual Studio Express 2013 for Web or Visual Studio Express 2013 for Desktop (which includes C++). Some of the features: works with CPython (2.x or 3.x) or IronPython. Full support for virtualenv, packages can be installed directly from PTVS individually or from requirements.txt. Intellisense uses a completion database generated in the background from the standard library and all installed libraries. It offers context sensitive completion which does a pretty good job of inferring the type of local variables based on the types of the values used to call the function. Refactoring (Rename, Extract Method, Add Import, Remove unused imports) Interactive windows for all installed Python versions (can use standard shell or IPython) Debugging locally or remotely including Linux and OS X targets (in fact they claim that anything capable of running Python can be debugged). Mixed mode Python and C++ debugging. Profiling (CPython only). Automatic test discovery for tests using unittest. Support for PyLint. Automatic deployment to Windows Azure. Extensive support for Django (including Intellisense and debugging for templates and various Django specific commands such as sync db and admin shell). -- Duncan Booth
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-08-06 02:50 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: Python and IDEs [was Re: Python 3 is killing Python] |
| Message-ID | <53e10b47$0$29991$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #75739 |
Duncan Booth wrote: > Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: > >> Unfortunately, software development on Windows is something of a >> ghetto, compared to the wide range of free tools available for Linux. I remember writing this. But I don't remember when it was. Presumably some time in the last six months :-) >> Outside of a few oases like Microsoft's own commercial development >> tools, it's hard to do development on Windows. Hard, but not >> impossible, of course, and there are quite a few resources available >> for the Windows user willing to download installers from the Internet. >> For Python users, the IDEs from Wingware and Activestate are notable: >> >> https://wingware.com/ >> http://komodoide.com/ >> >> >> > I missed this thread when it started, so please forgive me if this has > been covered, but by dismissing Microsoft you look to have skipped over > a very powerful Python IDE for Windows, namely PTVS. Never heard of it :-) Which is not surprising, since I'm not a Windows developer. [snip feature list] Nice. How does one get it? If I gave the impression that one cannot do development on Windows, that was not my intent. I tried to indicate that the difference was a matter of degree, not impossibility. One of the reasons why so many of the core developers for Python use Linux is that they got frustrated with the speed humps on Windows, the poor "out of the box" experience for developers (compare what dev tools you get with Windows by default versus what you get on Linux by default), but that might also be somewhat self-selecting: people who are happy with Windows development tend to stick to VB, Java, C, .Net etc. while those who prefer lighter weight more agile environments migrate to Linux. I don't know. But I do know that the existence of good quality Windows development tools for Python is good news for the community, so thank you for mentioning this. -- Steven
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web