'Run File' issues

[kai-morich]

'Run File' always opens a new terminal window. Could you reuse the window?
If already running the 'Run File' fails as the COM port is busy. Could you abort the previous run?
If already running other actions like Open Repl, Stop, Soft Reset also fail due to open COM port. Could you also here abort the run?

[DanielBustillos]

@kai-morich

Your feedback is spot on and aligns with the resource locking reported in #5.

Automating the 'abort and release' mechanism for the COM port is already in the pipeline. However, my current priority is hardening the sync-to-board engine to ensure stability during transfers.

Once the synchronization logic is fully robust, I’ll address these terminal and workflow conflicts.

Thanks for the thorough review. Feel free to keep the issues coming; I’ll be reviewing them as we move forward.

[DanielBustillos]

Thanks for the feedback, @kai-morich. I decided to address this now.

• Terminal Reuse: Done in Add clearRunFileTerminalIf function to manage terminal lifecycle #18. "Run File" now reuses a dedicated terminal tab to keep the workspace clean. Good idea.

Regarding auto-abort: After giving it some thought, I’m leaning towards an explicit Interrupt clic → Action sequence. Requiring a manual stop before running a new script or opening the REPL ensures the user has full control over the process state. The extension is inspired in Thonny's IDE workflow.

For my current use cases, I haven't seen a significant advantage to implicit behavior yet. However, I’m open to discussing specific scenarios where an implicit workflow might be superior. For now, I believe an explicit interrupt is more transparent.

[SilverNodashi]

Thanks for the feedback, @kai-morich. I decided to address this now.

• Terminal Reuse: Done in Add clearRunFileTerminalIf function to manage terminal lifecycle #18. "Run File" now reuses a dedicated terminal tab to keep the workspace clean. Good idea.

Regarding auto-abort: After giving it some thought, I’m leaning towards an explicit Interrupt clic → Action sequence. Requiring a manual stop before running a new script or opening the REPL ensures the user has full control over the process state. The extension is inspired in Thonny's IDE workflow.

For my current use cases, I haven't seen a significant advantage to implicit behavior yet. However, I’m open to discussing specific scenarios where an implicit workflow might be superior. For now, I believe an explicit interrupt is more transparent.

This could work quite well. Could you add a shortcut key for this? Like F5, or something?