Robert Kern wrote: > Edward Diener No Spam wrote: > >> There's nothing wrong with Python's introspection. In fact Python's >> facilities in this area and its support for metadata are stronger than >> any of these other languages ! However there is no common component >> model which specifies that X is a "property" or Y is an "event" of a >> Python class which can be visually manipulated at design-time and >> automagically set at run-time, so that any given Python RAD visual >> environment will treat a Python class, specified as a component, in >> exactly the same way. Also in these other languages, a component is >> different from a class in that a component is recognized in a >> particular way, often so that the component can interact if necessary >> with its container and/or visual site. > > You'll definitely want to take a look at Enthought's Traits (disclaimer: > I work for Enthought). I'm supposed to be on vacation now, so I'm not > going to give you the full rundown of Traits and Traits UI, so I'm > simply going to point you to the page we have about it: > > http://code.enthought.com/traits/
It looks as if traits is an attempt to create a "property" in the component terminology which I originally specified. I will take a look at it. > > You can talk to the rest of the Enthought crew on the enthought-dev > mailing list if you have any questions: > > https://mail.enthought.com/mailman/listinfo/enthought-dev Already subscribed. Thanks ! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
