Tkinter: The good, the bad, and the ugly!

[Octavian Rasnita]

From: "Adam Skutt" <askutt at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Tkinter: The good, the bad, and the ugly!


On Jan 17, 3:08 pm, "Octavian Rasnita" <orasn... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> From: "Adam Skutt" <ask... at gmail.com>
>> And we're not discussing those languages, we're discussing Python,
>> which has an explicit policy of "batteries included". As such,
>> criticism of the standard library is perfectly acceptable under the
>> name "Python", whether you like it or not. Besides, it's inevitable
>> anyway.
>
> "Batteries included"?
>
> Python doesn't follow this policy at all. We can say that maybe PHP 
> follows it, but not Python.
>

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=python+%22batteries+included%22&l=1


Well, this doesn't mean anything because Perl can also say that includes 
batteries, and PHP can say it also.

> And if this is the wanted policy, why should it be "cheap batteries 
> included" and not "strong batteries included"?

You'd have this same argument regardless of GUI toolkit you end up
picking, or even if you choose to not include one at all.  This would
be because none of them are universal solutions, all of them have
deficiencies (actual or perceived) that make them unsuitable for
certain applications.

Adam



You are perfectly right. Then why favor Tkinter and not WxPython. Why not 
strip the Python package and offer WxPython and Tkinter separately?

Octavian