From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Kitchin Subject: python :session issues Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 21:19:02 -0500 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba308b2e1ca54d04d504f35f Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35068) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2ubL-00017d-HI for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:19:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2ubH-0005qW-Mz for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:19:07 -0500 Received: from mail-lb0-f176.google.com ([209.85.217.176]:34019) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2ubH-0005qP-Ac for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:19:03 -0500 Received: by mail-lb0-f176.google.com with SMTP id s4so777209lbc.7 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:19:02 -0800 (PST) List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org --90e6ba308b2e1ca54d04d504f35f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I have been trying to use the :session feature of babel for python code blocks. I have noticed a few things that might be areas for improvement. Some issues are related to what I think might be a need for sanitizing the code blocks and the output. I am using (insert (org-version)) 7.9.3a I am using python-mode 5.2 (more modern versions do not work with :session for me) The first small detail is illustrated here: #+BEGIN_SRC python :session a = 5 b = 6 print a + b #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: : : >>> >>> >>> 11 In the output, there are three sets of >>>, due to the two empty lines. Compare this to #+BEGIN_SRC python :session a = 5 b = 6 print a + b #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: : : >>> 11 I think it would be nice to sanitize the python code block sent to the interpreter to eliminate the empty lines, and avoid the multiple >>> in output. It would also be nice to have an option to not print those at all. The second issue is related. The following code does not work for me in :session, but it works fine as a standalone block. The issue is related to the presence of an empty line in the function definition. I like whitespace like this in functions sometimes for readability. #+BEGIN_SRC python :session def func(x): 'doc string' return x**2 print func(2) #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: : : ... >>> File "", line 1 : return x**2 : ^ : IndentationError: unexpected indent : >>> None Removing the blank line works fine, but still has some non-pretty output. #+BEGIN_SRC python :session def func(x): 'doc string' return x**2 print func(2) #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: : : ... ... >>> 4 One of the ellipsis is due to the doc string. #+BEGIN_SRC python :session def func(x): return x**2 print func(2) #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: : : ... >>> 4 Interestingly, this did not work, because there is no empty line after the function definition. So, sanitizing could be tricky. #+BEGIN_SRC python :session def func(x): 'doc string' return x**2 print func(2) #+END_SRC #+RESULTS: : : ... ... File "", line 4 : print func(2) : ^ : SyntaxError: invalid syntax I think if there was a way to strip all the empty lines from the input, it would go a long way to making the output look like what I think most people would expect and want. Anyway, those are the examples I wanted to highlight in this post. 1. Do you see similar behavior, or is this a feature of my setup? 2. Is there any interest in sanitizing the input and output of a python :session to get prettier output? if so, Any hints on where to start with that? Thanks, John ----------------------------------- John Kitchin Associate Professor Doherty Hall A207F Department of Chemical Engineering Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 412-268-7803 http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu --90e6ba308b2e1ca54d04d504f35f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have been trying to use the :session feature of babel for python code
= blocks. I have noticed a few things that might be areas for
improvement.= Some issues are related to what I think might be a need for
sanitizing = the code blocks and the output.

I am using (insert (org-version)) 7.9.3a
I am using python-mode 5.2 = (more modern versions do not work with
:session for me)

The first= small detail is illustrated here:

#+BEGIN_SRC python :session
a =3D 5

b =3D 6

print a + b
#+END_SRC

#+RESULTS::
: >>> >>> >>> 11

In the output, th= ere are three sets of >>>, due to the two empty
lines. Compare = this to

#+BEGIN_SRC python :session
a =3D 5
b =3D 6
print a + b
#+E= ND_SRC

#+RESULTS:
:
: >>> 11

I think it would= be nice to sanitize the python code block sent to the
interpreter to el= iminate the empty lines, and avoid the multiple >>> in
output. It would also be nice to have an option to not print those at
al= l.

The second issue is related. The following code does not work for= me in
:session, but it works fine as a standalone block. The issue is r= elated
to the presence of an empty line in the function definition. I like
whit= espace like this in functions sometimes for readability.

#+BEGIN_SRC= python :session
def func(x):
=A0=A0=A0 'doc string'

= =A0=A0=A0 return x**2

print func(2)
#+END_SRC

#+RESULTS:
:
: ... >>>= ;=A0=A0 File "<stdin>", line 1
:=A0=A0=A0=A0 return x**2=
:=A0=A0=A0=A0 ^
: IndentationError: unexpected indent
: >>&= gt; None

Removing the blank line works fine, but still has some non-pretty
output= .

#+BEGIN_SRC python :session
def func(x):
=A0=A0=A0 'doc = string'
=A0=A0=A0 return x**2

print func(2)
#+END_SRC
<= br>#+RESULTS:
:
: ... ... >>> 4

One of the ellipsis is due to the doc= string.
#+BEGIN_SRC python :session
def func(x):
=A0=A0=A0 return= x**2

print func(2)
#+END_SRC

#+RESULTS:
:
: ... &g= t;>> 4

Interestingly, this did not work, because there is no empty line after<= br>the function definition. So, sanitizing could be tricky.

#+BEGIN_= SRC python :session
def func(x):
=A0=A0=A0 'doc string'
= =A0=A0=A0 return x**2
print func(2)
#+END_SRC

#+RESULTS:
:
: ... ...=A0=A0 File = "<stdin>", line 4
:=A0=A0=A0=A0 print func(2)
:=A0=A0= =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ^
: SyntaxError: invalid syntax

I think if the= re was a way to strip all the empty lines from the input,
it would go a long way to making the output look like what I think most
= people would expect and want.

Anyway, those are the examples I wante= d to highlight in this
post.


1. Do you see similar behavior,= or is this a feature of my setup?
2. Is there any interest in sanitizing the input and output of a
python = :session to get prettier output? if so, Any hints on where to start with th= at?

Thanks,

John

------------------= -----------------
John Kitchin
Associate Professor
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of = Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213<= br>412-268-7803
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu

--90e6ba308b2e1ca54d04d504f35f--