It seems there is a nice solution here: http://www.madebuild.org/blog/?p=30 Sylvain
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Sylvain Corlay <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Carlos, > > I fall into the case > if e.args[0] == ERROR_ACCESS_DENIED: > return > in lockfile.py, line 44. > > It seems to be related to > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2384022/winsdk-determining-whether-an-arbitrary-pid-identifies-a-running-process-on-win > > Sylvain > > > > > On Thursday, April 11, 2013 8:24:06 PM UTC-4, Sylvain Corlay wrote: >> >> Hi Carlos, >> >> Great for points 1 and 2. Sorry for the third one (Matlab cell feature). >> It seems indeed to involve more coding than I expected. >> For the last issue with the spyder.block folder, I only observe this >> behavior with windows XP. It works nicely with Ubuntu 12.04. A way to >> reproduce it with windows is to kill the main python process from the task >> manager and to restart spyder. pywin32 is installed (PythonXY 2.7.3). I run >> spyder 2.2rc from the bootstrap script. However, a reason for this issue >> could be that spyder's folder is on a network drive. I will make some tests >> tomorrow. >> >> Best, >> >> Sylvain >> >> On Thursday, April 11, 2013 6:20:35 PM UTC-4, Carlos Córdoba wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sylvain, >>> >>> Thanks for your patches and suggestions. My detailed answers are below: >>> >>> El 10/04/13 17:35, Sylvain Corlay escribió: >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> Here are a couple of issues in the release candidate. >>> >>> *1) When using "run selection"* >>> >>> Create a new .py file with the code >>> >>> >>> # No indentation between 'print i' and 'print i+1' >>> >>> for i in range(10): >>> >>> print i >>> >>> * >>> * >>> >>> print i+1 >>> >>> * >>> * >>> >>> Put the focus on a regular python console (not ipython), select all the >>> text in the editor and use the "run selection or current block" button. >>> >>> This yields an indentation error. This can probably be considered as a >>> bug. >>> >>> >>> *Fix:* In base.py (widgets/sourcecode) line 416 >>> >>> >>> # If there is a common indent to all lines, remove it >>> >>> min_indent = 999 >>> >>> current_indent = 0 >>> >>> lines = text.split(ls) >>> >>> for i in xrange(len(lines)): >>> >>> line = lines[i] >>> >>> if line.strip(): >>> >>> current_indent = _indent(line) >>> >>> min_indent = min(current_indent, min_indent) >>> >>> else: >>> >>> lines[i] = ' ' * current_indent >>> >>> text = ls.join([line[min_indent:] for line in lines]) >>> >>> * >>> * >>> >>> It solves the problem for me. The number of space characters added to >>> empty lines has to be the current indentation, for the case of nested >>> loops. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I was thinking something like this would solve the problem. Thanks >>> a lot for the patch, I'll review it later this week. >>> >>> *2) Editor widget and debug toolbar* >>> >>> * >>> * >>> >>> The debug toolbar items are missing when separating the editor dock from >>> the main window. >>> >>> *Fix:* In editor.py (plugins) line 903 >>> * >>> * >>> self.dock_toolbar_actions = file_toolbar_actions + [None] + \ >>> source_toolbar_actions + [None] + \ >>> run_toolbar_actions + [None] + \ >>> debug_toolbar_actions + [None] + \ >>> edit_toolbar_actions >>> >>> >>> >>> Again, thanks for the patch. This seems a harmless addition, so I'll add >>> it this weekend too. >>> >>> *3) Regarding issue >>> 852<https://code.google.com/p/spyderlib/issues/detail?id=852&q=MS%3Dv2.3&colspec=ID%20MS%20Stars%20Priority%20Modified%20Cat%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary> >>> * >>> >>> >>> With the first point corrected as mentioned above, the "hack" of >>> mixins.py documented already does the job to add the Matlab-like cell >>> feature. So I don't really see why one should consider it as a hack, or why >>> it would be less maintainable than the current version. >>> >>> >>> - text = unicode(cursor0.selectedText()**) >>> >>> - return len(text.strip()) == 0 or text.lstrip()[0] == '#' >>> >>> + text = unicode(cursor0.selectedText()**).lstrip() >>> >>> + return text[:2] == '# %%' or text[:12] == '# <codecell>' >>> >>> The thing is that with this modification, the behavior will already be >>> the one you want eventually, and this Matlab-like cell feature is the most >>> popular feature request in the tracker. To be rigorous, "block" should be >>> replaced by "cell" in doc strings, functions names, and menus. >>> >>> >>> I disagree with you on this point. I think we need to maintain "Run >>> selection" as a feature and add "Run cell" as a new one. This is my >>> reasoning: I want Spyder remains as beginner friendly as possible, so if >>> you want to select some text and send it to the console, that should still >>> be possible too. Also, if you want to run consecutive chunks of code >>> separated by blank lines (as it's the case now), that should be possible >>> too. I'm not so sure about block separation using '#'. I think once cells >>> are in we are going to eliminate it, as you're suggesting with our patch. >>> >>> I know that Carlos wants to add some graphical visualization of the >>> cells in the editor (horizontal lines and coloring), but with this >>> modification, the behavior of Spyder 2.2 would already be more consistent >>> with what you guys want to do in 2.3. >>> >>> >>> It's not only that I want to add visual clues to cells. There are >>> several things to consider: >>> >>> 1. Since "Run cell" is a new feature, it'll need a new icon in the Run >>> toolbar and of course a new action in the menus. We would need to add some >>> docs about it too. >>> >>> 2. Cells should not be allowed inside indented code (e.g for/while >>> loops). Someone mentioned that Matlab follows this principle and I think >>> it's a good one, i.e. cells must enclose full code chunks. >>> >>> 3. We need to decide what happens when one adds only one cell separator. >>> In that case I would like that Spyder ran all lines from the file's >>> beginning to the separator if the cursor is before it, or from the >>> separator to the end if the cursor is after it (I don't know how Matlab >>> handles this case). >>> >>> These points are not covered by your patch, so we (the devs) would need >>> to put more time on it (which don't have right now). Look, I don't want to >>> be stubborn here. If you make my points work and the feature is well >>> tested, I'll have no problem merging your work during the 2.2 cycle (let's >>> say in 2.2.1 or .2). The visual cell clues and all that could be added in >>> 2.3. >>> >>> *4) No warning in the case of presence of lock files* >>> >>> >>> If spyder crashes and spyder.lock directory remains, spyder won't >>> start again, and no error message is displayed. It just fails to start. >>> Maybe a their should be at least an error message in the console or even >>> better a pop-up window. >>> >>> >>> This is very serious. Under what circumstances is this happening to you? >>> I was very careful at selecting a lock mechanism that was able to launch >>> Spyder again if there is a crash. In Issue 1325 we discovered it won't work >>> on Windows if you don't have pywin32 installed. But on Linux and Mac it >>> should work as expected. >>> >>> Could you give us a reproducible test case? >>> >>> Finally, I would really like to thank Carlos, Pierre and Jed for their >>> incredible work on this IDE. I think that spyder 2.2 will really become a >>> reference. You guys are going to become as famous as the creators of >>> ipython, or numpy. Spyder was the missing link in the scientific python >>> world and you created it. >>> >>> >>> Thanks a lot for your kind words. We think that too: that something like >>> Spyder was missing to complete the Python scientific stack. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Carlos >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> >>> Sylvain >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "spyder" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]**. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/**group/spyderlib?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en> >>> . >>> For more options, visit >>> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> >>> . >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "spyder" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/spyderlib/brqE6p5bpkM/unsubscribe?hl=en. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "spyder" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
