Jim Jewett wrote:
> (6) Mark Hammond suggests that it might be easier to
> replace the interactive portions of python based on the
> "code" module. matplotlib suggests using ipython
> instead of standard python for similar reasons.
>
> If that is really the simplest answer (and telling users
>
Jim Jewett wrote:
> (6) Mark Hammond suggests that it might be easier to
> replace the interactive portions of python based on the
> "code" module. matplotlib suggests using ipython
> instead of standard python for similar reasons.
>
> If that is really the simplest answer (and telling users
> w
I think this is an excellent summary of the discussion so far. Probably
clearer than my own posts.
Thanks, Jim!
--Michiel.
Jim Jewett wrote:
>There has been enough misunderstanding in this thread
>that the summarizers are going to have trouble. So I'm
>posting this draft in hopes of clarificat
There has been enough misunderstanding in this thread
that the summarizers are going to have trouble. So I'm
posting this draft in hopes of clarification; please correct
me.
(1) There is some pre-discussion attached to patches
1049855 and 1252236. Martin Loewis and Michiel
de Hoon agreed that t
