3 ms·

I generally find it really hard to use full on IDEs like PyCharm for doing more investigative/research kinda work in Python, which is where Jupyter/Colab/Spyder

I generally find it really hard to use full on IDEs like PyCharm for doing more investigative/research kinda work in Python, which is where Jupyter/Colab/Spyder are great at. It's just a very different flow, creating a large application versus doing analysis/research.

jonnycomputer 6y ago
Pycharm Professional edition has a Scientific project type, which I was hoping someone has experience with.
alexchantavy 6y ago
I like to do a bit of a mix: write the library functions in Pycharm, then import and call them in Jupyter Lab. I used to try to do implementation too in Jupyter Lab but that got messy very quickly.
_coveredInBees 6y ago
Personally, I can't stand Jupyter for research because the introspection capabilities are so poor and limited compared to working in something like Spyder, Pycharm or VsCode. Moreover, I much prefer having interactive matplotlib plots for data exploration in a Qt/Gtk window rather than the inline matplotlib plots in Jupyter (though you can sometimes get it work to pop up windows for plots, but you still have a more interactive plotting experience in Pycharm/Spyder/VsCode) As someone who loves Spyder and used it a lot many years back, I've had no trouble doing all my scientific/algorithm prototyping in Pycharm while benefiting immensely from the astoundingly superior code intelligence/auto-complete/type-hinting in Pycharm. There is also a "Code Cell" plugin you can download for Pycharm that basically gets you to parity with Code-cells in Spyder/Matlab. For me, the excellent Python shell in Pycharm that supports multiline copy-paste, tab completion, and function-signature overlays makes prototyping algorithms and ideas much faster. That paired with the excellent history browser in Pycharm lets me easily grab relevant bits of code and promote them into a script or function and go from there. And then if you are trying to debug any algorithm, Pycharm is far superior on that front and I am far more efficient at debugging and fixing problems in Pycharm than in something like Vscode (though I do recall Spyder's debugger being pretty decent since it supports integration with IPython) There is a steep learning curve with Pycharm initially, but imo it works just fine (and for me at least, much better) in comparison to other things like Spyder/Jupyter. I would definitely recommend Spyder to most non-software engineer Python users, especially if they are in Data science. Nothing by <3 for Spyder's awesome data viewer widgets.
- lytefm 6y ago
  > Personally, I can't stand Jupyter for research because the introspection capabilities are so poor and limited compared definetely agree. I prefer to work with code cells and prefer Spyder for being less bloated and more responsive than Pycharm, for having multiple iPython consoles and a nicer Plot window when doing DS work, though. To me, PyCharms only shines when refactoring and testing code to make it production ready.

jonnycomputer 6y ago

Pycharm Professional edition has a Scientific project type, which I was hoping someone has experience with.

alexchantavy 6y ago

I like to do a bit of a mix: write the library functions in Pycharm, then import and call them in Jupyter Lab. I used to try to do implementation too in Jupyter Lab but that got messy very quickly.

_coveredInBees 6y ago

Personally, I can't stand Jupyter for research because the introspection capabilities are so poor and limited compared to working in something like Spyder, Pycharm or VsCode. Moreover, I much prefer having interactive matplotlib plots for data exploration in a Qt/Gtk window rather than the inline matplotlib plots in Jupyter (though you can sometimes get it work to pop up windows for plots, but you still have a more interactive plotting experience in Pycharm/Spyder/VsCode) As someone who loves Spyder and used it a lot many years back, I've had no trouble doing all my scientific/algorithm prototyping in Pycharm while benefiting immensely from the astoundingly superior code intelligence/auto-complete/type-hinting in Pycharm. There is also a "Code Cell" plugin you can download for Pycharm that basically gets you to parity with Code-cells in Spyder/Matlab. For me, the excellent Python shell in Pycharm that supports multiline copy-paste, tab completion, and function-signature overlays makes prototyping algorithms and ideas much faster. That paired with the excellent history browser in Pycharm lets me easily grab relevant bits of code and promote them into a script or function and go from there. And then if you are trying to debug any algorithm, Pycharm is far superior on that front and I am far more efficient at debugging and fixing problems in Pycharm than in something like Vscode (though I do recall Spyder's debugger being pretty decent since it supports integration with IPython) There is a steep learning curve with Pycharm initially, but imo it works just fine (and for me at least, much better) in comparison to other things like Spyder/Jupyter. I would definitely recommend Spyder to most non-software engineer Python users, especially if they are in Data science. Nothing by <3 for Spyder's awesome data viewer widgets.

lytefm 6y ago
> Personally, I can't stand Jupyter for research because the introspection capabilities are so poor and limited compared definetely agree. I prefer to work with code cells and prefer Spyder for being less bloated and more responsive than Pycharm, for having multiple iPython consoles and a nicer Plot window when doing DS work, though. To me, PyCharms only shines when refactoring and testing code to make it production ready.