Live data from Hacker News

Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

code.google.com

11–20 of 30 posts

Re: Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

#13

Spyder is a really nice interface, but it has one huge problem (on windows at least), you can only have one instance of it open at any given time. It's hugely irritating for experimentation and so mostly I use IPython Notebook these days.

You can however have as many consoles open as you need, and each file can have a unique set of run configurations. This obviates the "experimentation" problem.

Re: Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

#16
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm using version 2.2.4 on Mavericks without a problem

I was using 2.2.5

I tried version 2.2.5 and it worked, but I had to change the permission in the security preferences of OS X. Apparently Mavericks changed the permissions to only allow approved apps to run.

Re: Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

#17
I can't really relate to all the other great IDE's out there for Python, but in the scientific context I think Spyder makes a lot of sense. It tries to create a comfortable environment for scientists with a limited background on computer science. Especially for the more GUI oriented users, it is great to have a visual on the variables in the workspace with the variable inspector (like Matlab has). Debugging toolbar, object inspector showing rich text documentation (including MathJax rendered formulas), running a multitude of Python or IPython consoles, syntax checking etc makes it for my line of work as a scientist a very decent environment.

There was a nice tutorial given on the SciPy 2013 conference [0] by Carlos Cordoba (the main developer these days for Spyder I believe). What I also think is exciting is that he shows some ideas about how to integrate the IPython notebook in Spyder (last minutes of the talk). Would be interesting to see when that feature further materialize. I think that is a potential killer feature. There are more interesting idea's on further improving Spyder, please ping the mailing list if you are interested in helping out :-)

Besides python(x,y), the WinPython distribution [1] can sometimes offer some installation releave for Windows systems (don't have experience with it as a Linux user though).

@Rickasaurus: When running Spyder straight from source, you can have multiple instances running. Not sure in what context that would be useful besides developing Spyder with Spyder [2] though: python bootstrap.py -- --new-instance

@Derbasti: Spyder does work with Python 3 [3] for the older 2.1 branch. For 2.3 I believe full Python 3 support is also eminent.

[0] http://pyvideo.org/video/2113/the-advantages-of-a-scientific...

[1] https://code.google.com/p/winpython/

[2] http://code.google.com/p/spyderlib/wiki/NoteForContributors

[3] http://spyder-ide.blogspot.dk/2013/01/spyder-v2114-supports-...

Disclaimer: I am a tiny and modest Spyder contributor.

Edit: fix layout

Re: Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

#18
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was using 2.2.5

I tried version 2.2.5 and it worked, but I had to change the permission in the security preferences of OS X. Apparently Mavericks changed the permissions to only allow approved apps to run.

I have changed that, but still I can't launch spyder, because of an error :(

Re: Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

#19
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried version 2.2.5 and it worked, but I had to change the permission in the security preferences of OS X. Apparently Mavericks changed the permissions to only allow approved apps to run.

I have changed that, but still I can't launch spyder, because of an error :(

It seems that qt-4 is not supported on Mavericks.

Re: Spyder – Scientific Python Development Environment

#20
The problem with Python and its many IDE's is they still rely on textual code visual-sweeping. For example, you see import random but there is no shortcut to browse the random classes and methods. The same with all imported libraries. I am suprised how easily developers approve the old command line evaluator as comfortable. Try to rename several .py files while they are opened in your IDE and see what happens. Unacceptable for this age.

And there is the thing of terminology. Object inspector is just accessing method signature comments and parameter documentation. There is no real dynamic object inspection or retrospection in Python. And its MOP is extremely hard to use compared to other reflective languages. Sorry guys, but Python and IDE's still repeats a lot the same ideas.

Post reply on HN