Wheel-reinvention with Python
fuzzyman at gmail.com
Mon Aug 1 15:02:49 CEST 2005
Torsten Bronger wrote:
> Peter Decker <pydecker at gmail.com> writes:
> > On 7/30/05, Torsten Bronger <bronger at physik.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> >> I've been having a closer look at wxPython which is not Pythonic
> >> at all and bad documented. Probably I'll use it nevertheless.
> >> PyGTK and PyQt may have their own advantages and disadvantages.
> >> However, in my opinion we don't need yet another binding so thin
> >> that C or C++ is shining through, but a modern replacement for
> >> Tkinter with its Pythonic way of thinking.
> > I had the exact same impression when I started working with
> > wxPython: [...] I then discovered Dabo (http://dabodev.com), which
> > is a full application framework, but whose UI layer is a very
> > Pythonic wrapper around wxPython. I've created several apps now
> > using Dabo, even though I haven't even looked at the data
> > connectivity aspects of it; the UI code works fine without it.
> I'm aware of it (and there is Wax and maybe a third one). Actually
> it illustrates my point quite well: These projects are small and
> instable (Dabo has a developer basis of very few people, Wax has
> only one); they are even worse documented; they add another layer
> which slows down and requires the end-user to install another
> package; they force you to test even more GUI approaches.
Wax is small enough to distribute *with* large apps. It now has several
developers and part of the two 'google summer of code' projects working
on it will be to generate full documentation.
I find it makes writing GUI apps easier than with Tkinter and there is
no speed bottleneck form the GUI code !
All the best,
> ==> They contribute heavily to Dark Cowherd's observation that "it
> is shambles".
> Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus
More information about the Python-list