Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
> But since i like to do it The Right Way, I would > like to let the python-mode worry about this... > > Sorry if this is just a bunch of obvious thoughts to most of you. > > Regards, > Giovanni I dont see whats the problem. Heres my attempt to show you my emacs windows using python-mode (python.el never worked for me) ## Window 1 file foo.py (python mode) x = 1 y = 2 ## Window 2 python interpreter >>> Goto the python file (foo.py) Select the x=1 line C-c | (which is py-execute-region) Goto python interpreter window >>> x 1 >>> y ... NameError: y not defined What more/less/else do you want? Are you using python-mode.el or python.el? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
Piet van Oostrum writes: >> J Kenneth King (JKK) wrote: > >>JKK> Well, that's the thing -- type a statement into a python interpreter and >>JKK> you just get a new prompt. > >>JKK> LISP has a REPL, so you get some sort of feedback printed. > > iPython also has a REPL, but only when you enter the Python code > manually in the iPython window. > >>JKK> However, some sort of visual cue on the emacs side would be nice. Either >>JKK> just flash the block of code being sent or a minibuffer message would be >>JKK> nice. > >>JKK> Look for some SLIME tutorial videos on youtube to see some great >>JKK> interpreter <-> editor interaction. > > I have tried out SLIME with SBCL (just some simple code) but I didn't > like the feedback. I got unnecessary compiler warnings, and it was > difficult to find some useful information in it. > >>JKK> The stock Python interpreter probably wouldn't cut it close to something >>JKK> like SLIME in terms of features, but the iPython package might be a >>JKK> start. > > For now the iPython package for me has more options than I have had time > to try out. > On the other hand when you execute some code form a Python file (with > C-c C-c or C-c |) you get this > ## working on region in file /tmp/python-26084kfr.py... in the *Python* > buffer which is very uninformative. This is generated by python-mode, > not by iPython. You do get any output printed in the code, however, as > well as exceptions. > > I have made a change in my Python mode such that the > ## working on region in file /tmp/python-26084kfr.py... > message will be replaced by the actual code executed, if that code is > not too big (size configurable). And that looks nicer. > -- > Piet van Oostrum > URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] > Private email: p...@vanoostrum.org If you have a patch file for that, I'd be interested in trying it out. :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
> J Kenneth King (JKK) wrote: >JKK> Well, that's the thing -- type a statement into a python interpreter and >JKK> you just get a new prompt. >JKK> LISP has a REPL, so you get some sort of feedback printed. iPython also has a REPL, but only when you enter the Python code manually in the iPython window. >JKK> However, some sort of visual cue on the emacs side would be nice. Either >JKK> just flash the block of code being sent or a minibuffer message would be >JKK> nice. >JKK> Look for some SLIME tutorial videos on youtube to see some great >JKK> interpreter <-> editor interaction. I have tried out SLIME with SBCL (just some simple code) but I didn't like the feedback. I got unnecessary compiler warnings, and it was difficult to find some useful information in it. >JKK> The stock Python interpreter probably wouldn't cut it close to something >JKK> like SLIME in terms of features, but the iPython package might be a >JKK> start. For now the iPython package for me has more options than I have had time to try out. On the other hand when you execute some code form a Python file (with C-c C-c or C-c |) you get this ## working on region in file /tmp/python-26084kfr.py... in the *Python* buffer which is very uninformative. This is generated by python-mode, not by iPython. You do get any output printed in the code, however, as well as exceptions. I have made a change in my Python mode such that the ## working on region in file /tmp/python-26084kfr.py... message will be replaced by the actual code executed, if that code is not too big (size configurable). And that looks nicer. -- Piet van Oostrum URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: p...@vanoostrum.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
Piet van Oostrum writes: >> J Kenneth King (JKK) wrote: > >>JKK> I find that it does work, but unlike SLIME for lisp, it just imports the >>statement. > >>JKK> It confused me at first, but basically the interpreter doesn't provide >>JKK> any feedback to emacs. > >>JKK> Try opening a python source file (start python-mode if you don't have >>JKK> an autoload hook) and do C-c C-z to bring up the Python >>JKK> interpreter. Type in a simple assignment statement (like "a = 1 + 2" >>JKK> without the quotes) into the source file. Then just C-c C-c as >>JKK> usual. I never get any feedback. Just C-x o to the interpreter and >>JKK> print out the variable you just defined. It should be there. > > What kind of feedback do you expect? Well, that's the thing -- type a statement into a python interpreter and you just get a new prompt. LISP has a REPL, so you get some sort of feedback printed. However, some sort of visual cue on the emacs side would be nice. Either just flash the block of code being sent or a minibuffer message would be nice. Look for some SLIME tutorial videos on youtube to see some great interpreter <-> editor interaction. The stock Python interpreter probably wouldn't cut it close to something like SLIME in terms of features, but the iPython package might be a start. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
> J Kenneth King (JKK) wrote: >JKK> I find that it does work, but unlike SLIME for lisp, it just imports the >statement. >JKK> It confused me at first, but basically the interpreter doesn't provide >JKK> any feedback to emacs. >JKK> Try opening a python source file (start python-mode if you don't have >JKK> an autoload hook) and do C-c C-z to bring up the Python >JKK> interpreter. Type in a simple assignment statement (like "a = 1 + 2" >JKK> without the quotes) into the source file. Then just C-c C-c as >JKK> usual. I never get any feedback. Just C-x o to the interpreter and >JKK> print out the variable you just defined. It should be there. What kind of feedback do you expect? -- Piet van Oostrum URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: p...@vanoostrum.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
Giovanni Gherdovich writes: > Hello everybody, > > basically I'm writing here since I cannot > make my python.el work (a major mode for writing > python with emacs), but I would also like to share > my user experience and tell you what I think > an emacs mode should do, why do I like them > and hopefully have some feedbacks to see if I > misunderstood/underestimate something. > > > == 1) my python.el doesn't behave very well == > > I learnt somewhere > http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/PythonMode > that there are two major emacs mode for python around: > python-mode.el and python.el. > Asking my Emacs 22.3.1 about the variable load-path > issuing > 'C-h v load-path RET > I see that > /usr/share/emacs/22.3/lisp/progmodes > is in that path; there I find a file named > python.elc > which I assume to be some kind of emacs lisp bytecode > since is pretty much unreadable. > > So I searched the web for a plain version of it, > finding that the feature I use more, i.e. > sending a line of a text file to the > python buffer for evaluation (see below), correspond > to the key sequence > > \C-c\C-c > > (well, it's python-send-buffer, so maybe not a single > line but the whole buffer; the closest to my needs, anyway). > However: I open my Emacs, issue M-x python-mode, > then M-x run-python to have the interpreter in > a second buffer, I type something in the > first buffer and then C-c C-c, but nothing happens. > > Am I missing something? > Do I have any hope of having some sort of > send-line-to-python-buffer function working? > > > == 2) How do I use emacs modes for interpreted languages == > > Please note that what follows is just the personal perspective > of an unexperienced user. > > Syntax highlighting is a great thing, but is not as critical > to me as the feature I describe below. > > When I work with interpreted languages, I really hate doing it > in the shell; after 20 commands I easily lose control on > what happens and on which definitions are around. > > I use Emacs instead, so that I can have two buffers; in the > first I type my expressions, in the second I evaluate them > using some key bindings so that I can easily send the text > from the first buffer to the second one line by line. > > In this way I can easily refactor my code, and eventually package it > in a script if I like. > Usually after a while the intepreter buffer is a big mess, > so I restart it but my code is safe and sound in the first buffer. > > To do so, I don't really need a major mode, I admit; I just need > to put the following code in my .emacs: > > (fset 'send-line-other-window > [?\C-a ?\C- ?\C-e ?M-w right > ?C-x ?o ?C-y return ?\C-x ?o]) > (global-set-key [f11] 'send-line-other-window) > > Then I open emacs, C-x 2 to have a second buffer, > C-x o to switch to it and M-x shell to run bash in it. > Then, in the case of python, I run "python" in the > bash buffer. Then I type my code in the first and with F11 > I send lines to the interpreter. > > But since i like to do it The Right Way, I would > like to let the python-mode worry about this... > > Sorry if this is just a bunch of obvious thoughts to most of you. > > Regards, > Giovanni I find that it does work, but unlike SLIME for lisp, it just imports the statement. It confused me at first, but basically the interpreter doesn't provide any feedback to emacs. Try opening a python source file (start python-mode if you don't have an autoload hook) and do C-c C-z to bring up the Python interpreter. Type in a simple assignment statement (like "a = 1 + 2" without the quotes) into the source file. Then just C-c C-c as usual. I never get any feedback. Just C-x o to the interpreter and print out the variable you just defined. It should be there. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
Giovanni Gherdovich writes: > Hello everybody, Hi > (well, it's python-send-buffer, so maybe not a single > line but the whole buffer; the closest to my needs, anyway). > However: I open my Emacs, issue M-x python-mode, > then M-x run-python to have the interpreter in > a second buffer, I type something in the > first buffer and then C-c C-c, but nothing happens. What platform are you on? I use Aquamacs (which is a packaged Emacs for macos X, based on GNU Emacs 22.3.1) and for me C-c C-c works. It executes the content of the current buffer in a Python interactive buffer called *Python* (which it creates if it doesn't exist). -- Arnaud -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
what I would like python.el to do (and maybe it does)
Hello everybody, basically I'm writing here since I cannot make my python.el work (a major mode for writing python with emacs), but I would also like to share my user experience and tell you what I think an emacs mode should do, why do I like them and hopefully have some feedbacks to see if I misunderstood/underestimate something. == 1) my python.el doesn't behave very well == I learnt somewhere http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/PythonMode that there are two major emacs mode for python around: python-mode.el and python.el. Asking my Emacs 22.3.1 about the variable load-path issuing 'C-h v load-path RET I see that /usr/share/emacs/22.3/lisp/progmodes is in that path; there I find a file named python.elc which I assume to be some kind of emacs lisp bytecode since is pretty much unreadable. So I searched the web for a plain version of it, finding that the feature I use more, i.e. sending a line of a text file to the python buffer for evaluation (see below), correspond to the key sequence \C-c\C-c (well, it's python-send-buffer, so maybe not a single line but the whole buffer; the closest to my needs, anyway). However: I open my Emacs, issue M-x python-mode, then M-x run-python to have the interpreter in a second buffer, I type something in the first buffer and then C-c C-c, but nothing happens. Am I missing something? Do I have any hope of having some sort of send-line-to-python-buffer function working? == 2) How do I use emacs modes for interpreted languages == Please note that what follows is just the personal perspective of an unexperienced user. Syntax highlighting is a great thing, but is not as critical to me as the feature I describe below. When I work with interpreted languages, I really hate doing it in the shell; after 20 commands I easily lose control on what happens and on which definitions are around. I use Emacs instead, so that I can have two buffers; in the first I type my expressions, in the second I evaluate them using some key bindings so that I can easily send the text from the first buffer to the second one line by line. In this way I can easily refactor my code, and eventually package it in a script if I like. Usually after a while the intepreter buffer is a big mess, so I restart it but my code is safe and sound in the first buffer. To do so, I don't really need a major mode, I admit; I just need to put the following code in my .emacs: (fset 'send-line-other-window [?\C-a ?\C- ?\C-e ?M-w right ?C-x ?o ?C-y return ?\C-x ?o]) (global-set-key [f11] 'send-line-other-window) Then I open emacs, C-x 2 to have a second buffer, C-x o to switch to it and M-x shell to run bash in it. Then, in the case of python, I run "python" in the bash buffer. Then I type my code in the first and with F11 I send lines to the interpreter. But since i like to do it The Right Way, I would like to let the python-mode worry about this... Sorry if this is just a bunch of obvious thoughts to most of you. Regards, Giovanni -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
