agenda

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

agenda

Andreas Röhler-2

Hi all,

as we now happily are more than one person developing
python-mode.el, we should care to avoid parallel
writing, discuss some agenda.

>From my perspective the following is most urgent:

- adaptation to python 3.x (while maintaining backward compat)

- which-function-mode

As I'm a novice to python, I would choose the last,
leaving first to Berverley, if he feels able to.

Hi Beverley, do you?

Cheers

Andreas Röhler
_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: agenda

fbe2

LOL.

I haven't even looked at 3.0 yet. I have no idea what would be involved,
Andreas.  Are there any changes that would cause massive alterations in
the way a person using it would want it to look and feel in emacs?

<dum de dum... checking out changes in 3.0)

Well, after spending 15 minutes reading about the changes made in 'Py3k'
I can only say that the changes  to python-mode will have to be
discussed here.  There are plainly some things that need to be changed.
How much depends on strategic decisions about python-mode and what we
want it to be (e.g. how serious will the syntax checking/helping be?).  
Also, again, depending on strategic decisions, it *could* be hard to
make it backwardly compatible without specifying the version of Python
being used. They come pretty close to saying it's all but a new language
in a couple of places. They seem to be wanting to remove a lot of
the...ahh... (what to call it) the 'casual' feeling of Python and make
it much more strict.

I'd be glad to help with both the talking and the coding, of course.

- Bev


Andreas Roehler wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> as we now happily are more than one person developing
> python-mode.el, we should care to avoid parallel
> writing, discuss some agenda.
>
> >From my perspective the following is most urgent:
>
> - adaptation to python 3.x (while maintaining backward compat)
>
> - which-function-mode
>
> As I'm a novice to python, I would choose the last,
> leaving first to Berverley, if he feels able to.
>
> Hi Beverley, do you?
>
> Cheers
>
> Andreas Röhler
>
>  
_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: agenda

Barry Warsaw
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Jan 20, 2009, at 2:08 AM, Beverley Eyre wrote:

> I haven't even looked at 3.0 yet. I have no idea what would be  
> involved, Andreas.  Are there any changes that would cause massive  
> alterations in the way a person using it would want it to look and  
> feel in emacs?
>
> <dum de dum... checking out changes in 3.0)
>
> Well, after spending 15 minutes reading about the changes made in  
> 'Py3k' I can only say that the changes  to python-mode will have to  
> be discussed here.  There are plainly some things that need to be  
> changed. How much depends on strategic decisions about python-mode  
> and what we want it to be (e.g. how serious will the syntax checking/
> helping be?).  Also, again, depending on strategic decisions, it  
> *could* be hard to make it backwardly compatible without specifying  
> the version of Python being used. They come pretty close to saying  
> it's all but a new language in a couple of places. They seem to be  
> wanting to remove a lot of the...ahh... (what to call it) the  
> 'casual' feeling of Python and make it much more strict.

I haven't even started looking at what changes we'd want to make for  
Python 3.0, but I'm a bit afraid that it will be nearly impossible to  
support both python3 and python2 without getting a lot more complicated.

Until now, we've really only targeted the "latest" version, so for  
example, even if you were using say Python 2.0, you'd still get @-
syntax highlighting and with-as-a-keyword. This was mostly okay even  
if it was occasionally distracting.

But Python 3.0 is significantly different that I think we're going to  
have to figure out a way for the mode to support multiple versions of  
Python.  E.g. is print() highlighted or not?  Maybe it won't be that  
bad, but an evaluation has to take place.

I have a deck of slides for a presentation on what's new in Python  
2.5, 2.6, and 3.0.  I've just given the presentation for a second time  
and have permission to make them public.  Perhaps it will be helpful.  
I'll send a message around when it's available.

- -Barry

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iQCVAwUBSXXdP3EjvBPtnXfVAQLCpQQAj9tIvuQ0ZwNBgn4Ht0zM8i7iEf7d9s06
Sx5UaDKVE4iH3EhByhjtVR5ulBh4oT5UxxK99UuyfHynjd/VCYyYDHkkIXAbEToJ
fXpatU8/OxHyvdcuT7VPyMOJSwdTvp6m0LGwGmVMsoSukeMpbV/ACEKVcyuqI4Yy
PofCmpcYs4E=
=34Fv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: agenda

Eric S. Johansson
In reply to this post by fbe2
Beverley Eyre wrote:

>
> LOL.
>
> I haven't even looked at 3.0 yet. I have no idea what would be involved,
> Andreas.  Are there any changes that would cause massive alterations in
> the way a person using it would want it to look and feel in emacs?
>
> <dum de dum... checking out changes in 3.0)
>
> Well, after spending 15 minutes reading about the changes made in 'Py3k'
> I can only say that the changes  to python-mode will have to be
> discussed here.  There are plainly some things that need to be changed.
> How much depends on strategic decisions about python-mode and what we
> want it to be (e.g. how serious will the syntax checking/helping be?).
> Also, again, depending on strategic decisions, it *could* be hard to
> make it backwardly compatible without specifying the version of Python
> being used. They come pretty close to saying it's all but a new language
> in a couple of places. They seem to be wanting to remove a lot of
> the...ahh... (what to call it) the 'casual' feeling of Python and make
> it much more strict.
>
> I'd be glad to help with both the talking and the coding, of course.

it would be nice if we could put some additional features for programming by
voice.  In addition to some other navigation things I've spoken about earlier,
it would be useful to have a set of visible symbols and their scope.  Within the
file would be good, including all of the imported modules would be wonderful.
It would be superb if we could identify which class and instance belong to so we
can dynamically restrict what can be recognized to just the methods of the class.

I know this isn't easy and may not be possible but it's incredibly useful.


---eric

_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: agenda

Andreas Röhler-2
Eric S. Johansson wrote:

> Beverley Eyre wrote:
>> LOL.
>>
>> I haven't even looked at 3.0 yet. I have no idea what would be involved,
>> Andreas.  Are there any changes that would cause massive alterations in
>> the way a person using it would want it to look and feel in emacs?
>>
>> <dum de dum... checking out changes in 3.0)
>>
>> Well, after spending 15 minutes reading about the changes made in 'Py3k'
>> I can only say that the changes  to python-mode will have to be
>> discussed here.  There are plainly some things that need to be changed.
>> How much depends on strategic decisions about python-mode and what we
>> want it to be (e.g. how serious will the syntax checking/helping be?).
>> Also, again, depending on strategic decisions, it *could* be hard to
>> make it backwardly compatible without specifying the version of Python
>> being used. They come pretty close to saying it's all but a new language
>> in a couple of places. They seem to be wanting to remove a lot of
>> the...ahh... (what to call it) the 'casual' feeling of Python and make
>> it much more strict.
>>
>> I'd be glad to help with both the talking and the coding, of course.
>
> it would be nice if we could put some additional features for programming by
> voice.

What about to implement some reporting feature,
saying via message-buf for example what is closed?

We could proceed in two steps: First introduce such a reporting level for all
 things, than make the voices side.

Or should we consider something special right from the beginning?

  In addition to some other navigation things I've spoken about earlier,

> it would be useful to have a set of visible symbols and their scope.  Within the
> file would be good, including all of the imported modules would be wonderful.
> It would be superb if we could identify which class and instance belong to so we
> can dynamically restrict what can be recognized to just the methods of the class.
>
> I know this isn't easy and may not be possible but it's incredibly useful.
>
>
> ---eric
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-mode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
>

_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: agenda

Eric S. Johansson
Andreas Roehler wrote:

> What about to implement some reporting feature,
> saying via message-buf for example what is closed?
>
> We could proceed in two steps: First introduce such a reporting level for all
>  things, than make the voices side.
>
> Or should we consider something special right from the beginning?

I'm afraid you've lost me.  With speech recognition (what you say is what it
types... mostly) I would like to try and create an environment where, based on
the current cursor position, I can ask the editor certain questions such as,

what method/class are you in?
what type of name are you (class, variable)?
if you are a class, what methods do you know about?

there's something I'm not quite sure how to handle yet such as choosing from a
list of objects and invoking the right argument signature.  I'm not too worried
though.  These things usually come to me about 15 minutes too late.  :-)


_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: agenda

Andreas Röhler-2
Eric S. Johansson wrote:

> Andreas Roehler wrote:
>
>> What about to implement some reporting feature,
>> saying via message-buf for example what is closed?
>>
>> We could proceed in two steps: First introduce such a reporting level for all
>>  things, than make the voices side.
>>
>> Or should we consider something special right from the beginning?
>
> I'm afraid you've lost me.  With speech recognition (what you say is what it
> types... mostly) I would like to try and create an environment where, based on
> the current cursor position, I can ask the editor certain questions such as,
>
> what method/class are you in?
> what type of name are you (class, variable)?
> if you are a class, what methods do you know about?
>
> there's something I'm not quite sure how to handle yet such as choosing from a
> list of objects and invoking the right argument signature.  I'm not too worried
> though.  These things usually come to me about 15 minutes too late.  :-)
>
>
>

introduced

`py-close-function' and `py-close-class'.

That's the kind of thing you asked first. It's
useful for me too.

It's available from

https://code.launchpad.net/~a-roehler/python-mode/python-mode.el


Andreas Röhler



_______________________________________________
Python-mode mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-mode