Patches item #1201522, was opened at 2005-05-13 13:08 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by kbk You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1201522&group_id=5470
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: IDLE Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Rejected Priority: 5 Submitted By: Jeff Shute (jshute) >Assigned to: Kurt B. Kaiser (kbk) Summary: patch IDLE to allow running anonymous code in editor window Initial Comment: This patch modifies IDLE so that when you can run code in an editor window that does not have a filename without first having to save the code. When you are editing an existing file, or have already saved the code once (giving it a filename), you are still required to save before you can run. This is useful when using IDLE for interactive hacking or calculating. Having to save and choose a filename is annoying when typing and running code that you have no intention of keeping, and tends to encourage editing big blocks of code in the shell when using an editor window would really be more convenient. I think the only reason that the save is required is because the debugger was getting confused when it did not have a backing file with the code. This patch fixes the debugger so it can handle unsaved anonymous code, and can highlight the correct source line in the edit window when the show source box is checked. The enhancement also works for the shell window, so the debugger can highlight the source line in the shell window (which may be something other than the last command, eg a function definition). The stack viewer and goto line command are also fixed to handle unsaved edit windows and the shell. It probably makes sense to apply this trivial patch also so you can get syntax highlighting in unsaved editor windows. http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1196895&group_id=5470&atid=305470 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Kurt B. Kaiser (kbk) Date: 2005-10-02 16:27 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=149084 Having thought about this for awhile, I've concluded that the patch raises the risk of unintentionally losing code that one thought was being autosaved. It's simple enough to generate a throwaway filename, perhaps today's date, and clean the old ones out once in a while. Or reuse a file named scratch.py: pick it from the Recent Files menu, hit Select All followed by Backspace. The benefit/risk tradeoff just isn't good enough. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1201522&group_id=5470 _______________________________________________ Patches mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/patches
