| msg54423 - (view) |
Author: paul rubin (phr) |
Date: 2005-04-03 08:48 |
| The file menu in Editor windows could benefit from a "reload" function that re-reads the file from disc and loads it into the editor, replacing what's currently in the editor. That's useful for those of us who like to edit with Emacs in another window while running the code under Idle. To get really fancy, it might be cool to optionally display a diff between the in-editor version and the on-disk version allowing merging changes, but that's maybe over the top. Other editors usually do have commands like this, e.g.M-x Revert-file in Emacs or ":e!" in vi. |
|
|
| msg54424 - (view) |
Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) *  |
Date: 2005-04-18 22:48 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=80475 If added, it should definitely be called "revert" instead of "reload". The latter already has a specific meaning in Python that relates to imports. The former seems to be standard terminology across a number of editing tools from emacs to photoshop. |
|
|
| msg54425 - (view) |
Author: Kurt B. Kaiser (kbk) * |
Date: 2005-04-19 02:55 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=149084 Why do you use Emacs instead of IDLE? (I use emacs myself sometimes, but I'm curious what your reasons are these days.) |
|
|
| msg54426 - (view) |
Author: Kurt B. Kaiser (kbk) * |
Date: 2005-05-26 16:20 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=149084 I like the Revert idea better. It probably should be above "Close" in the File menu. Otherwise, if it's next to "Recent Files", someday someone is going to select it by mistake and be really ticked. I think the suggestion violates KISS. Over time, it's ideas like this that cause creeping features and a boated interface. But again, why not use IDLE instead of emacs to edit Python code? One button Save/Run! What is the killer feature that's missing from IDLE? That would be the real thing to work on. |
|
|
| msg54427 - (view) |
Author: Kurt B. Kaiser (kbk) * |
Date: 2005-06-05 14:32 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=149084 Responding to your "misplaced" post, I use emacs for everything also; basically I live in emacs. However, my question still stands. Have you tried IDLE with the autosave and F5 to run? If IDLE had incremental search it would be pretty close or maybe even better. I used to use emacs to develop IDLE but I find I'm increasingly using IDLE for that purpose. |
|
|
| msg81446 - (view) |
Author: Daniel Diniz (ajaksu2) *  |
Date: 2009-02-09 06:55 |
| Superseder: issue 5138. |
|
|
| msg81583 - (view) |
Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * |
Date: 2009-02-10 19:07 |
| Kurt, is this something you can add? Closed the duplicate issue 5138 and leaving this open. IDLE would be *much* easier to use in conjunction with version control if there were a reload option that did the equivalent of (close current with no save, followed by open current file). |
|
|
| msg81624 - (view) |
Author: Daniel Diniz (ajaksu2) * |
Date: 2009-02-11 04:22 |
| It seems discussion in issue 1721083 is more advanced... should this one be closed? :) |
|
|
| msg83101 - (view) |
Author: David W. Lambert (LambertDW) |
Date: 2009-03-03 21:15 |
| 0->kbk I avoid idle altogether and run python in emacs shell buffer. Switching windows usually involves mice. Mice are evil. emacs has gazillions of features. artist mode (oops, mice!) rectangular regions, registers, 25 (hundreds with C-{digit}) reasonable places to move the cursor with a couple keystrokes. calc, modes, keyboard macros, mail, directory editing, buffer shared on multiple x-servers ... |
|
|
| msg91212 - (view) |
Author: Guilherme Polo (gpolo) * |
Date: 2009-08-03 02:34 |
| Closing this in favour of . |
|
|