Wheel-reinvention with Python

phil hunt zen19725 at zen.co.uk
Mon Aug 1 10:00:40 CEST 2005


On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 14:52:58 -0400, Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> wrote:
>Torsten Bronger <bronger at physik.rwth-aachen.de> writes:
>> Hallöchen!
>> Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> writes:
>>> Torsten Bronger <bronger at physik.rwth-aachen.de> writes:
>>>> Calvin Spealman <ironfroggy at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> The choice is GUI toolkits is largely seperate from
>>>>> Python. Consider that they are just bindings to libraries that
>>>>> are developed completely seperate of the language. GUI is should
>>>>> be seperate from the language, and thus not bound to same
>>>>> expectations and desires as elements of the language itself.
>>>> I disagree.  A modern language must provide a convenient and
>>>> well-embedded way to write GUI applications.
>>> The tools for writing GUI applications belong in a library, not
>>> the langauge.
>> None of us has talked about changing syntax.  However, the standard
>> library is part of the language unless you're really very petty.
>
>Or you use different Python implementations. There are four different
>Python implementations in the world. Not everything in the CPYthon
>standard library runs in all of them. 

I would guess that 90%+ of Python developers develop to CPython.

>To put this differently, it's required if you want to succeed as a
>language for the specific purpose of creating GUI applications. I'd
>agree to that. But there are *lots* of other application areas around,
>so limiting your definition of "success" to that one field is very
>short-sighted.

GUI applications are a large area; and langauge that doesn't do 
them tolerably well is limiting its success.


-- 
Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk





More information about the Python-list mailing list