[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Back to idl after a looong time...
- Subject: Re: Back to idl after a looong time...
- From: Alex Schuster <alex(at)pet.mpin-koeln.mpg.de>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:41:21 +0100
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.idl-pvwave
- Organization: Max-Planck-Institut fuer neurologische Forschung
- References: <3a6dfe3f@news.ColoState.EDU> <MPG.email@example.com> <3A718A0A.DB179360@pet.mpin-koeln.mpg.de> <3A71A99E.D96A732E@noaa.gov> <3A75859C.93B9CAD8@pet.mpin-koeln.mpg.de> <MPG.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Xref: news.doit.wisc.edu comp.lang.idl-pvwave:23301
David Fanning wrote:
> Alex Schuster (email@example.com) writes:
> > Okay-okay, looks like some people really like it. I had tried it,
> > but was disappointed and continued using the command line version. I
> > must admit that I first hadn't figured out that I could have multiple
> > edit windows outside the development environment, that was the biggest
> > drawback. Am I right that this is still the case in the Windows
> > version?
> As far as I know there is no limit to the number of edit windows
> you can have open in the IDLDE. At least, I've never run up
> against a *practical* limit, and I've had lots and lots open
> at once. :-)
Thatīs right, but I meant windows OUTSIDE the IDLDE. I just do not like
to have a big window inside of which all my edit windows reside. Under
Unix, I can place these windows outside the IDLSE if I want, anywhere on
the screen. In Windows, I can at least place all info windows like the
variable watch or the command line outside the main window, but not the
edit windows. Iīd prefer to have it the other way around. And, maybe, if
I had noticed from the beginning that this limit wasnīt in the Unix
version, I might have used it more frequently. But maybe not, I miss
features like saving all windows on exit, so I donīt have to reload them
after exiting IDL. You know, in these days before .RESET_SESSION, which
my IDL doesnīt know about yet.
> > There are some nice features like the variable
> > watch, but yes, David, I'm just fine with print
> > statements for debugging. Am I too old-fashioned here?
> I'm getting better with the debugger (and of course
> it is wonderful and works great), but for the quick
> look I confess I still use Print statements, too. :-)
And that without noticing the existence of .SKIP.
Alex Schuster Wonko@weird.cologne.de PGP Key available