Here is my improved version of Squeezer - the IDLE
extension to end all of your
oh-no-I-just-printed-War-and-Peace-in-the-interpreter
troubles!

Changes:
* Fixed line counting logic
* Line counting is done according to current window
width and current tab width
* Fixed configHandler to enable reading of raw data
from config files (100% backwards compatible) - needed
by Squeezer to enable configuration of text viewers in
config-extensions

I've been working this vesion without a hitch for
several weeks, but that's hardly enough testing is it?

Attached:
* the original Squeezer.py by Noam Raphael
* a diff against Noam's original Squeezer.py
* a diff of configHandler.py against the current SVN
version (revision 46863)
* fixed 'middle click to copy' - now works on Windows


One minor note - the 'middle click to copy' didn't work
on Windows because it simply called selection_own()
which doesn't affect the clipboard. I added
clipboard_clear() and clipboard_append() and it now
works on Windows. This should be tested on Linux, Unix,
OSX etc. to check compatibility.

For more info on the clipboard issue, see:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/647feeef55625733/bc08421d8aea9928?lnk=st&q=&rnum=2#bc08421d8aea9928

Logged In: YES 
user_id=149084

OK, thanks.  Please take a look at the two diffs you
uploaded, they seem corrupted.  Squeezer.py looks ok.

Logged In: YES 
user_id=1330769

Uploaded unified diffs instead of standard diffs. Probably
the first diffs had bad newlines because I'm working on Win.

Also 2 changes:
* minor fix - end case when clicking at beginning of text block
* Allow squeezing of stderr (tracebacks...)

Logged In: YES 
user_id=149084

Ah, that's better. Thanks.

Delete the patch to configHandler.py, implemented with Patch 1650174.

"Test needed"? I'll need a bit of guidance on this.

Has there been a change of policy of which I'm not aware, that patches
to IDLE not going to be accepted unless comprehensive tests are included?

Much of IDLE doesn't include tests, e.g. the RPC code. There's a comment
by K.B.K. in the end of rpc.py from September '03 saying we need a
proper test suite for it, and testing that should be simple compared to
testing GUI related functionality.


In any case, if someone can suggest a simple approach to test Squeezer
I'll gladly work it up. As it is, I can think of ways to test certain
functions, but I'm not sure how to approach testing GUI related
functionality (or if I should approach this at all).

Tal,
There is no such policy AFAIK. The stage field is a tool to help us
handle the issues, sorry to give you a wrong impression. If IDLE has no
tests, 'test needed' doesn't apply here, so we can set this to 'patch
review'.

If someone is already working on adding tests for IDLE, please revert
this to 'test needed'.

Daniel, Thanks for clearing that up :)