What's your favorite Python editor?

My favorite editor, I don't really use anything except notepad (that goes for all programming I do :-). I guess I am a command line person.

-kudos

My favorite editor, I don't really use anything except notepad (that goes for all programming I do :-). I guess I am a command line person.

-kudos

Then you gotta get Notepad++!

I've always used IDLE. It's quite sufficient for my purposes.

I like both Stani's Python Editor and Boa Constructor. Although I prefer SPE's test editor, I use Boa because it generates almost all my wxPython GUI Code.
The benefits these text editors:
1. An "exporer" view of modules lets you go right to any class or function definition and even variable asignments!
2. Double clicking on any line in a traceback takes you to that line (in any module).
3. Both of these editors requier wxPython installation and once you see how good wx looks and feels, you want to rework all of your old Tk applications.

I've always used IDLE. It's quite sufficient for my purposes.

Hi, nonbecoming. Welcome to the python forum. You are right; IDLE is sufficient (I used it for years) and it has some nice features like open module from a line of code. But it also has some glitches which I eventually got tired of (like where the end of a short line is when you click way out on the right) and a bug in find and replace that I never tracked down. Keep posting,
Barton

I used to like Stani's Python Editor but now I use for quick tests IDLE, for bigger apps Eclipse plugin PyDev is a very nice IDE for Python combined with wxGlade for RAD gui apps and for console tasks vim.

I used to like Stani's Python Editor but now I use for quick tests IDLE, for bigger apps Eclipse plugin PyDev is a very nice IDE for Python combined with wxGlade for RAD gui apps and for console tasks vim.

Thanks for the post, alpha! I'll have to check some of these out. Like you, I still use IDLE to quickly run tests. Welcome to the python forum. Come back soon, OK.

the thing that I hate about IDEs is the following; they often produce an extremly amount of files that nobody knows what is doing. And even worse, if you change something in these files, its very likely that you "project" will rendered unvalid. IDE can simplify tasks, like setting linker, compiler and designing the GUI in a WYSIWYG manner, but these tasks are typically only done once during development. That basically why Ì am a command line person :-)

the thing that I hate about IDEs is the following; they often produce an extremly amount of files that nobody knows what is doing. And even worse, if you change something in these files, its very likely that you "project" will rendered unvalid. IDE can simplify tasks, like setting linker, compiler and designing the GUI in a WYSIWYG manner, but these tasks are typically only done once during development. That basically why Ì am a command line person :-)

BUT... I have coded the GUI by hand in the olden days and it is a killer of productivity. In large apps with many gui aspects, I feel it is essential for software to generate the code. That way we spend out time writing the fuctionality and not the look and feel. For example, I refuse to learn html simply because it looks like it is (or should be) generated by a machine. I am a designer, not a code generating machine. That's what I really think,
Barton.

I agree in a ideal world, but consider this; You said that you refused to learn html (which is understandable) but how can you be certain that the person that created the generator did the job correctly? For instance (for the html case) take a look at the html code that comes out of macromedia dreamweaver, hardly the html code I would use to have most compatible code. And think about the debugging process? Now you don't know if you did something wrong, or the error was created during the code generating phase. Ofcourse, you have the same problem when going from c++ --> assembler, but in my experience those errors comes less frequent...

-kudos

BUT... I have coded the GUI by hand in the olden days and it is a killer of productivity. In large apps with many gui aspects, I feel it is essential for software to generate the code. That way we spend out time writing the fuctionality and not the look and feel. For example, I refuse to learn html simply because it looks like it is (or should be) generated by a machine. I am a designer, not a code generating machine. That's what I really think,
Barton.

I use spe, idle and boa constructor. I also use pype sometimes. I would be unhappy unless I had all three on my system, The only code generator I use is boa constructor, I just don't understand the other wxpython one and have no use for it.

Pythonwin is what I have always used. At his point we do not need any GUI stuff and have a bunch of modules we can import. This enables me to focus on the project at hand. I have SPE loaded, but I have not developed anything in it yet.

Has anyone used Kodos by Phil Schwartz? If you do much with regular expressions, this is an excellent tool.

BUT... I have coded the GUI by hand in the olden days and it is a killer of productivity. In large apps with many gui aspects, I feel it is essential for software to generate the code. That way we spend out time writing the fuctionality and not the look and feel. For example, I refuse to learn html simply because it looks like it is (or should be) generated by a machine. I am a designer, not a code generating machine. That's what I really think,
Barton.

I agree, After getting over the starting hump, I'm getting much more comfortable with Boa.

I agree in a ideal world, but consider this; You said that you refused to learn html (which is understandable) but how can you be certain that the person that created the generator did the job correctly? For instance (for the html case) take a look at the html code that comes out of macromedia dreamweaver, hardly the html code I would use to have most compatible code. And think about the debugging process? Now you don't know if you did something wrong, or the error was created during the code generating phase. Ofcourse, you have the same problem when going from c++ --> assembler, but in my experience those errors comes less frequent...

-kudos

Sorry kudos, I had missed this post. Of course I have a counterpoint. Since the subject of this (hijacked) discussion is GUI generation, which simply gets the widgets coded in a graphical environment without any functionality, improper implementaion in the generator which could cause a bug in the generated code will show up visibly on the screen. So, if it looks right, it is right. Debugging is complete. As long as all of the constructor parameters are accessable in some easy to use fassion, this type of tool will save the designer countless hours. For that matter, with a really mature tool that correctly draws the GUI elements, even more time is saved as there is no need to run the code to see what it looks like (not always the case with Boa, at this point). Just point, click and drag, click the generate button and start adding the fuctionality (doing the real work of the software engineer). But, now let me tell you how I really feel... <grin>