[IPython-dev] Curses Frontend Update

Toni Alatalo antont@an....
Fri Apr 23 23:09:05 CDT 2010


Fernando Perez kirjoitti:
>> they do fairly well. the urwid library is quite nice, and although
>> documentation is not perfect, it is good, and the whole thing provides
>> far more than curses - curses requires you to manually handle resizing,
>> for example. The code for the urwid part is therefore far simpler, and
> Still, this is a tough one: I am genuinely worried about depending on
> a possibly undeveloped project. Have you contacted the urwid devs to
> find out a little bit about future plans/py3 development ideas?

One way to think about it is to compare the efforts of:

a) reimplementing things that urwid does, like handling resizing 
mentioned above etc., in the ipython curses frontend

vs

b) converting urwid to py3k yourself (shouldn't that be relatively easy 
with 2to3 for a small pure py lib?)

I do agree it's a tough one. There is the danger that the person doing 
that ends up being the urwid maintainer in general if other devs are not 
active. That has been happening with my and PythonQt (the qtscript like 
thing for embedded py in qt apps) now, kind of, 'cause am so far the 
only one who has made it to work on Qt 4.6 (with an ugly hack) and 
haven't heard back from questions nor patches etc., that's not fun when 
you have a lot of other things todo .. but another story alltogether.

> Using curses when urwid is around may feel painful, but at this point
> closing the door on py3k development possibilities sounds a little

There are few closed doors with open source :)

I guess depends on how useful Urwid is in general, and whether there are 
other uses and devs who fix etc. it otherwise and are eventually 
switching over to py3k too. So what Fernando suggested about asking 
around seems to be the thing to do indeed.

2cently yours,
~Toni

> dangerous for us.  On the other hand, I do see the differences:
> 
> amirbar[wendell]> wc -l ipyurwid/*py
>   117 ipyurwid/interpreterwidget.py
>   252 ipyurwid/palette_test.py
>   105 ipyurwid/urwidpygments.py
>   474 total
> 
> amirbar[wendell]> wc -l ipycurses/*py
>   151 ipycurses/basicsequence.py
>   142 ipycurses/cursesextras.py
>    71 ipycurses/cursesparser.py
>   347 ipycurses/cursespygments.py
>    32 ipycurses/interpreterwidget.py
>    11 ipycurses/ipythontest.py
>    18 ipycurses/keytester.py
>    57 ipycurses/prototype.py
>    66 ipycurses/tester.py
>   241 ipycurses/vipad.py
>   123 ipycurses/vipadtester.py
>  1259 total
> 
> Since I can't run the urwid code right now, how equivalent are the two
> in terms of functionality? I'm basically trying to gauge if the above
> line counts can be fairly compared...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> f
> _______________________________________________
> IPython-dev mailing list
> IPython-dev@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/ipython-dev



More information about the IPython-dev mailing list