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

[Corey Richardson]

On 01/18/2011 09:16 PM, rantingrick wrote:
> On Jan 18, 7:59 pm, Corey Richardson <kb1... at aim.com> wrote:
>> On 01/18/2011 08:41 PM, rantingrick wrote:
> 
>> >From that, it appears we need to:
>>
>> 1. Replace Tkinter with something more modern and feature-complete, but
>> just as easy to use.
>> 2. Add a web framework/web-GUI
> 
> That would be a HUGE step in the correct direction. It would not solve
> all our problems however its a start. Like i mentioned earlier with
> Tkinter it is fact that sooner or later you will come up against the
> glass ceiling. At that point your only alternative is to toss away
> everything you have learned/written and re-learn another GUI library
> like wxPython. This is what bothers me most about Tkinter. It just
> sums to wasted time and energy. If we had a simplistic wxGUI in the
> stdlib, when you hit the ceiling and need to go further you could then
> scale nicely to the feature richness of wxPython as a 3rd party
> download -- WITHOUT relearning/rewriting everything!
> 

You mentioned having a segment of wxPython in the stdlib earlier. If
this actually feasible from a legal standpoint, and would the
maintainers of wxPython be willing to put it in the stdlib? Not to
mention the wonderful people over at python-dev.

Why would you add in only a part of wxPython, instead of all of it? Is
the work to cut it down really an advantage over the size of the full
toolkit? From what I just checked, the source tarball is 40MB. Can that
much really be added to the Python stdlib? What other alternatives are
there, besides wxPython, that are perhaps a bit smaller.

> 
>> Given the above, what do you guys (python-list, not just rantingrick)
>> think fills the spot the best?
> 
> Well i hope some heavy weights weigh in however i must tell you that
> it don't happen very often.
> 
>