Future of PythonWin?

[Tom]

Mark,

Thanks for the response.

I'm interested in your comments on MFC because I'm an MFC developer who is
looking for an alternative.

I agree that MFC seems to be on the way out, but there are two things that
prevent me (and some other MFC developers) from switching:
1) The CodeTools & CodeGuru sites contains TONS of peer reviewed code (in
the form of messages at the end of every article) that is free, even for
commercial use.  80% of this code is in the form of MFC extensions.
2) What's next?
- STL?  Yes, but that's not a GUI.
- ATL & WTL?  Too MS only.
- wxWindows?  Only has a tiny fraction of the number of users & code that
the other options have.
- TCL/TK?  I've heard this is slow, and it can't create native windows' apps
(users want the windows look & feel).
- Java?  Again, too proprietary.

Since I'm starting to learn Python (using your book), it would be nice to
use something that is in common use from both Python and C++.  I guess that
leaves me with wxWindows.

BTW, I think I'm part of the target market for your Visual Studio Python
product.  I know VS quite well, so it would be nice (ie. worth paying for)
to be able to develop for Python in it.  If this meant that I could use the
windows' resources that I'm familiar with than that would also be
convenient, but then the cross-platform character of Python would be lost -
so I don't know which I would prefer.

Tom.

"Mark Hammond" <mhammond at skippinet.com.au> wrote in message
news:m03%4.6579$Hz.48365 at news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Tom" <tom-main at REMOVEME.home.com> wrote in message
> news:w3Q_4.160138$55.3354931 at news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
>
> > Studio 7, but what does this all mean for the future of the PythonWin?
>
> Dunno.  Not much will change.  As usual, no one will be paying me to work
> on it! :-)
>
> > Will PythonWin (the IDE and the MFC wrapper library) continue to be
> actively
> > and publicly developed?
>
> Dunno.  I like it :-)  If Active State end up developing an IDE that I
> would personally prefer to use over Pythonwin, then I doubt I will spend
> too much time on Pythonwin as an IDE.  I seriously doubt that will be MSVC
> based to qualify.  Certainly, the extra resources AS can dedicate should
> mean the Mozilla based IDE ends up qualifying, but Pythonwin exists today
> and is quite slick on Windows (as opposed to the cross-platform focus of
> AS) meaning I doubt it will qualify in the short term.
>
> The good side of this is that is doesnt "compete" directly with any AS
> products.  One IDE is focussed on existing MSVC (and maybe new) owners,
> while the other will be a great cross-platform solution.  Pythonwin doesnt
> try and be either of these!  So while it is unlikely that AS will fund
> further development of Pythonwin, they also will certainly not discourage
> me from continuing to tinker.
>
> Re MFC: Microsoft dont seem too interested in MFC any more.  Ive certainly
> heard nothing about it, and everything new I see has alternatives that
> compete directly with it.
>
> Unfortunately, my personal opinion is that MFC itself will die pretty
> soon, kept alive only by the weight of all the old code written for it.
> So with that in mind, I dont believe that MFC will undergo enough
> significant enhancements that keeping up will be a problem!
>
> Mark [and obviously not speaking for ActiveState]
>
>