Wgy isn't there a good RAD Gui tool fo python

CM cmpython at gmail.com
Wed Jul 13 02:22:07 CEST 2011

On Jul 12, 5:18 pm, rantingrick <rantingr... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 12, 1:43 pm, CM <cmpyt... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > One reason there hasn't been much demand for a GUI builder is that, in
> > > > many cases, it's just as simpler or simpler to code a GUI by hand.
> > I use a GUI builder because I'd rather click less than
> > type more. I just tried that in Boa Constructor; with ~10
> > mouse clicks I produced 964 characters of Python code.
> Remember, it's NOT the length of the code that matters, no, it's the
> motion of the "sources" ocean. Did it produce rough seas full of
> spaghetti monsters? Or tranquil fjords worth pining over (sadly to
> death apparently?)?

In my experience, the GUI builder I use creates reasonable code
that deals with the GUI in a separate portion of the code.  It does
not strike me as spaghetti-ish (though it's not perfect).

> Also, you MAY have created 964 chars of code with your ten or so
> clicks HOWEVER that is just template code. You'll need to set many
> attributes for the widgets before they are ready for prime time. Your
> "supposed" ten or so click estimate is very naive. It takes MUCH more
> to create even a simple GUI, because, we have NOT even discussed logic
> yet!

Sure.  But my point was just that to even get as far as I did (which
just a frame and two unspecified widgets) takes 964+ keystrokes, but
only ~10 clicks.  So the pacing of keystrokes:clicks is favorable.
If I built a small functioning GUI application, it  might take 100
and 9,640 keystrokes (very roughly).  But it is the same point.

> > I would use a sketch-pad and pencil and *then* use the GUI builder.
> But do you really? Your following statements lead me to believe that
> you don't.
> > What's nice about a builder is one can move things around
> > quickly and see the results in the real application, which
> > one can never really see well on a paper sketch. 

I just meant that though I might start on paper, once it is on
the screen I sometimes will shift things around a bit at that point
to see how it looks.  This is easily done with sizers and a sizer
collection manager and an up/down arrow, so it is worth an
extra minute to just see how it looks.

>  1. GUI builders remove us from the initial "mental design phase" and
> temp us to let our inner "click-ity-click" and "drag-ity-drag" child
> loose. This inner child likes to play but he hates to plan. Very soon
> he has the play room floor (source code) overflowing with toys (code)
> arranged in a completely haphazard way. Unlike the child however,
> there is no code mommy to spank this bad little boy when he is a
> programmer. So he just keeps messing up play room after play room
> making a complete fool of himself along the way.
>  2. GUI builders remove us from the source code. When you are playing
> "clicky-click" with yourself you could be in the trenches fighting the
> spaghetti code monster. Instead you are losing mental focus. Remember,
> playing with yourself makes you lazy!

I've certainly heard of others who feel that working with only code
is "cleaner" for them, mentally speaking.  I can understand that.  I
think it just depends on what one is used to.  I don't find the GUI
builder disrupts my ability to plan or keep things orderly.  In fact,
most of my disorder and spaghetti problems have been in the logic
side of the applications, the part which the GUI builder doesn't have
anything to do with.  (That's my own issue to keep working on).

> Kevin made the argument earlier that Tkinter (and others) are so easy
> to use that they render needing a GUI builder useless -- and he is
> correct! But did you know that there are GUI libraries EVEN more
> highly abstracted than Tkinter? Oh yes! So your "OMG, this typing and
> using my imagination is so difficult" *crap* is really making me
> laugh.

My attitude is, if I could speak in English to an AI to tell it what
I'd like
the program to do, I'd do it. Yes, since I can't do that, I inevitably
sometimes enjoy puzzling things out, but only because I have to.

> PS: if you don't like to type, programming IS NOT the best career (or
> hobby) choice for you.

I guess it is not so much that I dislike typing, as I dislike having
switch from visual mode to code mode, remember the keywords and
such for the widgets, rather than quickly clicking around.  The
keystroke count is really just a proxy for that sort of effort.


More information about the Python-list mailing list