Making wxPython a standard module?

Grant Edwards grante at visi.com
Sat Jun 14 21:15:46 CEST 2008


On 2008-06-14, Diez B. Roggisch <deets at nospam.web.de> wrote:

>>> And on a personal note: I find it *buttugly*.
>> 
>> Do you mind explaining "why" you find it *buttugly*?

[...]

> For the curious: Not the look & feel (albeit I prefer KDE on
> linux over Gnome, which is a Qt/GTK thing and thus affects wx
> look & feel as well), but the code & the designers.

I've never used any of the designers, but I agree 100% that
wxPython code is nasty ugly. wxPython has a very un-Pythonic
API that's is, IMO, difficult to use.  The API isn't really
Robin Dunn's fault: wxPython is a very thin wrapper around
wxWidgets, so it largely retains the same nasty low-level C++
API that wxWidgets has.  I presume much of wxPython is
generated in some automated fasion (a la swing).  There have
been a couple attempts to wrap wxPython in a cleaner, more
Pythonic API, but they've have limited success (wax is the one
I can think of off the top of my head).

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! If I had a Q-TIP, I
                                  at               could prevent th' collapse
                               visi.com            of NEGOTIATIONS!!



More information about the Python-list mailing list