visualpython-users

[Visualpython-users] new files

[Bruce S. <bas...@un...>]

At http://vpython.org is a new Windows installer and new zip files for all
the VPython components. This incorporates an important update by Jonathan
Brandmeyer, who found and fixed a memory leak associated with mouse status.

The new Windows installer puts all the Visual machinery in
PythonXX\Lib\site-packages\visual, including the Visual module, demos,
documentation, and IDLE for VPython.

This Windows installer no longer tampers with PythonXX\Doc. It does
overwrite any existing Numeric module with the latest Numeric 23.0 (and this
is noted on the Windows download page).

The zip files include the files used with InnoSetup to create the Windows
installer.

Bruce Sherwood

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Arthur <ajs...@op...>]

> The new Windows installer puts all the Visual machinery in
> PythonXX\Lib\site-packages\visual, including the Visual module, demos,
> documentation, and IDLE for VPython.
>
> This Windows installer no longer tampers with PythonXX\Doc. It does
> overwrite any existing Numeric module with the latest Numeric 23.0 (and
this
> is noted on the Windows download page).

All very good news.

My issues with the Windows distribution is narrowed to one.  The fact that
anyone with a prior existing Numeric installation will lose it if they
choose to uninstall VPython. Not earth-shattering.

I am still hoping that if there is a satisfactory "stand-alone" Windows
VPython distribution - which is truly a single download and isolated from
any other Python installation on the machine (along the lines which I have
been pursuing) - there will be more willingness to decouple Numeric and
VPython in a VPython as "extension module" distribution.

But I do certainly  appreciate Bruce's willingness to be open-minded in
taking a fresh look at some of these issues.

Art

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Bruce S. <bas...@un...>]

Since we have found that even college students majoring in engineering or
science sometimes install only Python or only Visual and then wonder why
nothing works, it does seem like a good idea to make a single installer
aimed at novices that includes minimal Python plus Visual plus an editor
(Idle_VPython or ScITE).

There are some political and practical issues.

Would the Python people be uncomfortable/unhappy if we made such a bundled
thing, containing a stripped-down Python, or even a full Python? Right now
there isn't even a copy of Python at vpython.org, just a link to a file
housed at python.org. That link gets you an official Python, complete with
libraries, etc. (and documentation in the Windows case).

A practical issue is that the download traffic from vpython.org would
increase significantly due to the much larger installer containing Python.
This isn't necessarily terrible but I should opt for a higher download limit
from that site. (Recently traffic has grown to where some increase is going
to be needed in any case.)

It would be important for vpython.org to be very clear in its instructions,
something along the lines of "If you don't have Python, install this bundle.
If you already have Python, here's an add-on package."

Bruce Sherwood

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur" <ajs...@op...>
To: "Bruce Sherwood" <bas...@un...>; "vpusers"
<vis...@li...>
Cc: "Jonathan Brandmeyer" <jdb...@un...>
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Visualpython-users] new files


> > The new Windows installer puts all the Visual machinery in
> > PythonXX\Lib\site-packages\visual, including the Visual module, demos,
> > documentation, and IDLE for VPython.
> >
> > This Windows installer no longer tampers with PythonXX\Doc. It does
> > overwrite any existing Numeric module with the latest Numeric 23.0 (and
> this
> > is noted on the Windows download page).
>
> All very good news.
>
> My issues with the Windows distribution is narrowed to one.  The fact that
> anyone with a prior existing Numeric installation will lose it if they
> choose to uninstall VPython. Not earth-shattering.
>
> I am still hoping that if there is a satisfactory "stand-alone" Windows
> VPython distribution - which is truly a single download and isolated from
> any other Python installation on the machine (along the lines which I have
> been pursuing) - there will be more willingness to decouple Numeric and
> VPython in a VPython as "extension module" distribution.
>
> But I do certainly  appreciate Bruce's willingness to be open-minded in
> taking a fresh look at some of these issues.
>
> Art

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Steve S. <st...@sp...>]

Hi Bruce,
On Sunday, March 16, 2003, at 02:08  PM, Bruce Sherwood wrote:

> Since we have found that even college students majoring in engineering 
> or
> science sometimes install only Python or only Visual and then wonder 
> why
> nothing works, it does seem like a good idea to make a single installer
> aimed at novices that includes minimal Python plus Visual plus an 
> editor
> (Idle_VPython or ScITE).
>
> There are some political and practical issues.
>
> Would the Python people be uncomfortable/unhappy if we made such a 
> bundled
> thing, containing a stripped-down Python, or even a full Python? Right 
> now
> there isn't even a copy of Python at vpython.org, just a link to a file
> housed at python.org. That link gets you an official Python, complete 
> with
> libraries, etc. (and documentation in the Windows case).

I doubt anybody would mind. Zope (the product that arguable pays the 
bills for much of the python team) itself is distributed in binary form 
(as well as source) that includes a pretty complete binary distribution 
of python for each major platform. In my own Zope work these days I 
always build custom python installations to run Zope. A globally 
installed python is too hard to manage when different pieces of 
software depend on it, but compiled components need to be upgraded with 
python! Sometimes python upgrades break some aspect of some software. 
If you are using a global python (e.g., /usr/local/bin/python) and an 
upgrade to improve thing1 happens to break thing2, then you won't 
discover the problem until you next attempt to run thing2. By then... 
you may have forgotten the upgrade.. etc.

>
> A practical issue is that the download traffic from vpython.org would
> increase significantly due to the much larger installer containing 
> Python.
> This isn't necessarily terrible but I should opt for a higher download 
> limit
> from that site. (Recently traffic has grown to where some increase is 
> going
> to be needed in any case.)

Is the VPython group interested in the possibility of using something 
like sourceforge? The vpython.org site could just be a reference point, 
but most "real" development could happen on sourceforge.net. That gets 
you an instant array of mirrored worldwide servers, plus CVS, plus easy 
developer/documentation management, etc..

I've heard gloom and doom about sourceforge's future, but I've got 
several projects there now, and have been pretty happy with the service 
and functionality of the site. The fact that it's actually *free* is a 
source of astonishment for me.

-steve

>
> It would be important for vpython.org to be very clear in its 
> instructions,
> something along the lines of "If you don't have Python, install this 
> bundle.
> If you already have Python, here's an add-on package."
>
> Bruce Sherwood
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Arthur" <ajs...@op...>
> To: "Bruce Sherwood" <bas...@un...>; "vpusers"
> <vis...@li...>
> Cc: "Jonathan Brandmeyer" <jdb...@un...>
> Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 1:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Visualpython-users] new files
>
>
>>> The new Windows installer puts all the Visual machinery in
>>> PythonXX\Lib\site-packages\visual, including the Visual module, 
>>> demos,
>>> documentation, and IDLE for VPython.
>>>
>>> This Windows installer no longer tampers with PythonXX\Doc. It does
>>> overwrite any existing Numeric module with the latest Numeric 23.0 
>>> (and
>> this
>>> is noted on the Windows download page).
>>
>> All very good news.
>>
>> My issues with the Windows distribution is narrowed to one.  The fact 
>> that
>> anyone with a prior existing Numeric installation will lose it if they
>> choose to uninstall VPython. Not earth-shattering.
>>
>> I am still hoping that if there is a satisfactory "stand-alone" 
>> Windows
>> VPython distribution - which is truly a single download and isolated 
>> from
>> any other Python installation on the machine (along the lines which I 
>> have
>> been pursuing) - there will be more willingness to decouple Numeric 
>> and
>> VPython in a VPython as "extension module" distribution.
>>
>> But I do certainly  appreciate Bruce's willingness to be open-minded 
>> in
>> taking a fresh look at some of these issues.
>>
>> Art
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open!
> Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and
> the chance of winning an Apple iPod:
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en
> _______________________________________________
> Visualpython-users mailing list
> Vis...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/visualpython-users

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Bruce S. <bas...@un...>]

We do use sourceforge for CVS, bug tracking, etc., all aimed at developer
needs. But it seemed better to put the user-oriented web site vpython.org
somewhere else.

Bruce Sherwood

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Spicklemire" <st...@sp...>
To: "Bruce Sherwood" <bas...@un...>
Cc: "Steve Spicklemire" <st...@sp...>; "vpusers"
<vis...@li...>
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

> Is the VPython group interested in the possibility of using something
> like sourceforge? The vpython.org site could just be a reference point,
> but most "real" development could happen on sourceforge.net. That gets
> you an instant array of mirrored worldwide servers, plus CVS, plus easy
> developer/documentation management, etc..

RE: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Tom M. <mun...@st...>]

Can't all this be scripted in some kind of wizard? 

-----Original Message-----
From: vis...@li...
[mailto:vis...@li...] On Behalf Of
Bruce Sherwood
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 11:08 AM
To: vpusers
Subject: Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

Since we have found that even college students majoring in engineering
or
science sometimes install only Python or only Visual and then wonder why
nothing works, it does seem like a good idea to make a single installer
aimed at novices that includes minimal Python plus Visual plus an editor
(Idle_VPython or ScITE).

There are some political and practical issues.

Would the Python people be uncomfortable/unhappy if we made such a
bundled
thing, containing a stripped-down Python, or even a full Python? Right
now
there isn't even a copy of Python at vpython.org, just a link to a file
housed at python.org. That link gets you an official Python, complete
with
libraries, etc. (and documentation in the Windows case).

A practical issue is that the download traffic from vpython.org would
increase significantly due to the much larger installer containing
Python.
This isn't necessarily terrible but I should opt for a higher download
limit
from that site. (Recently traffic has grown to where some increase is
going
to be needed in any case.)

It would be important for vpython.org to be very clear in its
instructions,
something along the lines of "If you don't have Python, install this
bundle.
If you already have Python, here's an add-on package."

Bruce Sherwood

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur" <ajs...@op...>
To: "Bruce Sherwood" <bas...@un...>; "vpusers"
<vis...@li...>
Cc: "Jonathan Brandmeyer" <jdb...@un...>
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Visualpython-users] new files


> > The new Windows installer puts all the Visual machinery in
> > PythonXX\Lib\site-packages\visual, including the Visual module,
demos,
> > documentation, and IDLE for VPython.
> >
> > This Windows installer no longer tampers with PythonXX\Doc. It does
> > overwrite any existing Numeric module with the latest Numeric 23.0
(and
> this
> > is noted on the Windows download page).
>
> All very good news.
>
> My issues with the Windows distribution is narrowed to one.  The fact
that
> anyone with a prior existing Numeric installation will lose it if they
> choose to uninstall VPython. Not earth-shattering.
>
> I am still hoping that if there is a satisfactory "stand-alone"
Windows
> VPython distribution - which is truly a single download and isolated
from
> any other Python installation on the machine (along the lines which I
have
> been pursuing) - there will be more willingness to decouple Numeric
and
> VPython in a VPython as "extension module" distribution.
>
> But I do certainly  appreciate Bruce's willingness to be open-minded
in
> taking a fresh look at some of these issues.
>
> Art



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! 
Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and 
the chance of winning an Apple iPod:
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en
_______________________________________________
Visualpython-users mailing list
Vis...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/visualpython-users

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Arthur <ajs...@op...>]

> Would the Python people be uncomfortable/unhappy if we made such a bundled
> thing, containing a stripped-down Python, or even a full Python? Right now
> there isn't even a copy of Python at vpython.org, just a link to a file
> housed at python.org. That link gets you an official Python, complete with
> libraries, etc. (and documentation in the Windows case).

I honestly don't think so.

This is not at all unusual.  When the clear intention is to focus on a
specific application - like VPython - I see nothing controversal about
creating an environment appropriate to that focus.  I see it as within the
intentions of the Python creators and maintainers. The Python license is,
IMO, specifically designed to accommodate this kind of distribution.

The hotter political issue is, I suspect, not including IDLE in a standalone
VPython distribution - as VPython is sort of part of the history of IDLE, as
the move toward the merge of IDLE and IDLEfork proceeds.  Perhaps the
"official" VPython standalone should include IDLE.  SciTE for VPython could
be available as a separate download for those who might want to give it a
whirl.  On the contributions page - from me.

As to docs, my idea is to keep the VPython index.html as is, except to point
the Python help to the online url at python.org, rather than to a local copy
of the docs.  It assumes online access, of course.

As a general statement -

I aan't help  wondering why you feel this concern about Python in the
proposed distribution, and not about Numeric, in the current distribution.
The situations are fully analogous, in my mind.

As I've said before, its the "neither fish nor fowl" that might raise
issues. It seems to me that a stand-alone distribution, that is clearly
understood to be a stand-alone environment - handles, rather than escalates
these issues.

All this is admittedly one guy's take on it.  Others might have reason to
disagree.

>
> A practical issue is that the download traffic from vpython.org would
> increase significantly due to the much larger installer containing Python.
> This isn't necessarily terrible but I should opt for a higher download
limit
> from that site. (Recently traffic has grown to where some increase is
going
> to be needed in any case.)

The VPython standalone setup.exe (which includes ScITE) is about 3.5 megs -
the current VPython about 1.6 megs.  Your call about how significant the
traffic issue is. Personally I think VPython should be more ubiqitous than
it is.  Find it hard to see this as a big issue at what I expect are the
current levels of trafiic.

>
> It would be important for vpython.org to be very clear in its
instructions,
> something along the lines of "If you don't have Python, install this
bundle.
> If you already have Python, here's an add-on package."
>

Plan2 -

I am - no surprise - working toward a standalone PyGeo implementation. It,
of course, will include the full VPython.  I guess you could just point
folks who might like a stand-alone environment towards it, instead of having
anything at vpython.org.  But, of course, I will be trying to highlight
PyGeo as well as VPython, in such a distribution.

Art

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Bruce S. <bas...@un...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur" <ajs...@op...>

> As to docs, my idea is to keep the VPython index.html as is, except to
point
> the Python help to the online url at python.org, rather than to a local
copy
> of the docs.  It assumes online access, of course.

In the latest Windows installer the VPython index.html is in
Lib\site-packages\visual\docs. It has a link to the local Python
documentation, because it is present in the standard Python Windows
distribution; I see no reason to link to the web except in the possible
context of a stripped-down Python that didn't include documentation. I did
however take your suggestion and have the Numeric doc link to the web.

Bruce Sherwood

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Arthur <ajs...@op...>]

> In the latest Windows installer the VPython index.html is in
> Lib\site-packages\visual\docs. It has a link to the local Python
> documentation, because it is present in the standard Python Windows
> distribution; I see no reason to link to the web except in the possible
> context of a stripped-down Python that didn't include documentation.

I agree.

But this is my intended solution specifically as to a stand-alone
environment that would not include the Python documentation locally.

Thinking about it though, beyond the "political" issues, IDLE is probably a
better solution than ScITE for a standalone environment.  I do think that
both an interactive prompt, and an editing environment are necessary.  ScITE
is only an editor.  I think of this in the context of documentation, because
I am actually more likely to do something like:

Python 2.2.2 (#37, Nov 26 2002, 10:24:37) [MSC 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Type "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
IDLE 0.8 -- press F1 for help
>>> import cmath
>>> dir(cmath)
['__doc__', '__name__', 'acos', 'acosh', 'asin', 'asinh', 'atan', 'atanh',
'cos', 'cosh', 'e', 'exp', 'log', 'log10', 'pi', 'sin', 'sinh', 'sqrt',
'tan', 'tanh']

then I am to access the html docs, at least as a first step, in trying to
get a handle on some specific area of Python.

Of course there is always the cmd prompt, which isn't hideous on XP.  But I
do much prefer IDLE for interactive experimentation, and the like.

Art

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Bruce S. <bas...@un...>]

Arthur, you may be in a position to clear up something for me. Evidently
you, like many other users of Python, find it convenient/useful/natural to
do these little explorations in the shell rather than typing

import cmath
print dir(cmath)

into an edit window and hitting F5. Why is this? I feel much more
comfortable in an edit window, where the full history and context is clear
(including the import status), and where I can easily make modifications to
try a change after the first try.

Bruce Sherwood

----- Original Message -----
From: "Arthur" <ajs...@op...>
To: "Bruce Sherwood" <bas...@un...>; "vpusers"
<vis...@li...>
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Visualpython-users] new files


> Thinking about it though, beyond the "political" issues, IDLE is probably
a
> better solution than ScITE for a standalone environment.  I do think that
> both an interactive prompt, and an editing environment are necessary.
ScITE
> is only an editor.  I think of this in the context of documentation,
because
> I am actually more likely to do something like:
>
> Python 2.2.2 (#37, Nov 26 2002, 10:24:37) [MSC 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
> Type "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
> IDLE 0.8 -- press F1 for help
> >>> import cmath
> >>> dir(cmath)
> ['__doc__', '__name__', 'acos', 'acosh', 'asin', 'asinh', 'atan', 'atanh',
> 'cos', 'cosh', 'e', 'exp', 'log', 'log10', 'pi', 'sin', 'sinh', 'sqrt',
> 'tan', 'tanh']
>
> then I am to access the html docs, at least as a first step, in trying to
> get a handle on some specific area of Python.
>
> Of course there is always the cmd prompt, which isn't hideous on XP.  But
I
> do much prefer IDLE for interactive experimentation, and the like.
>
> Art

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[Arthur <ajs...@op...>]

> Arthur, you may be in a position to clear up something for me. Evidently
> you, like many other users of Python, find it convenient/useful/natural to
> do these little explorations in the shell rather than typing
>
> import cmath
> print dir(cmath)

Probably not much more to it than instant gratification, or flow, or
whatever you might want to call it.  At the prompt, I feel myself to be in
inquiry, exploration, and experiment mode.

Even though there is no compile cycle in Python, there is a "run" cycle when
working from script. And I associate a certain amount of  formality with
working in that mode.

Working at the prompt has a flow to it that can become something of a
dialogue with the language, in some sense.

All a little soft, as an explanation.  But as you say, I think I am not at
all unusual in using the interactive prompt in this manner.

Art

Re: [Visualpython-users] new files

[<ba...@ph...>]

Maybe I can add a few more arguments to this:
Imagine you wrote a module which does some computation
(say 1-3 mins) and then you would like to explore the results,
eg. plot some data. This is much more easily done with
an interactive session than using the editor and run
(because you do not know yet how the output looks like).
For example I use IPython (http://www-hep.colorado.edu/~fperez/ipython/)
a lot which has many nice features (TAB completion, session logging,
macros, colored exception traceback, is embeddable, easy access
to gnuplot, etc. etc. ...)

I think that this approach (together with embedding IPython) is
great for debugging.

A bit off-topic: did you manage to solve
the problems with sockets and idle(fork) ?
((I brought this question up on the idlefork mailing list,
but did not get any response ;-))

Arnd


On Sun, 16 Mar 2003, Arthur wrote:

> > Arthur, you may be in a position to clear up something for me. Evidently
> > you, like many other users of Python, find it convenient/useful/natural to
> > do these little explorations in the shell rather than typing
> >
> > import cmath
> > print dir(cmath)
>
> Probably not much more to it than instant gratification, or flow, or
> whatever you might want to call it.  At the prompt, I feel myself to be in
> inquiry, exploration, and experiment mode.
>
> Even though there is no compile cycle in Python, there is a "run" cycle when
> working from script. And I associate a certain amount of  formality with
> working in that mode.
>
> Working at the prompt has a flow to it that can become something of a
> dialogue with the language, in some sense.
>
> All a little soft, as an explanation.  But as you say, I think I am not at
> all unusual in using the interactive prompt in this manner.
>
> Art
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open!
> Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and
> the chance of winning an Apple iPod:
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en
> _______________________________________________
> Visualpython-users mailing list
> Vis...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/visualpython-users
>