On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 11:28:30 AM UTC-4, Marcio Sales wrote: > > That's a bummer. IJulia doesn't have the problems of the other editors. > For example, Juno is not working with 0.4, Emacs is tough to install on > windows and I think is having problems with 0.4 as well. Atom works, but in > my experience it has problems displaying help text (text lines extend to > out of the screen) and you can't copy printed outputs. Of course you can > still work with these problems but they make you take more time. > All of this work well in IJulia. > > What editors are you guys using? Do you have any of these problems? >
Basically, I use IJulia for interactive exploration, prototyping, and course notes or research notes. But for developing larger packages, I use an editor (I use Emacs, but tastes vary) and either import the files into IJulia to explore interactively or go the other direction (prototype a function in in IJulia, then paste it into my file once it is working). Atom looks promising, though I haven't really used it. In addition to the Julia-language plugin for Atom (https://github.com/JuliaLang/atom-language-julia) and the Juno-like Julia client for Atom (https://github.com/JunoLab/atom-julia-client), there is also a general plugin called Hydrogen that allows you to send code to an arbitrary Jupyter kernel from Atom: https://atom.io/packages/hydrogen
