"Mauro Cicognini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> > Alex Martelli wrote: > >> URK -- _my_ feeling is that we have entirely *too many* options >> for stuff like web application frameworks, GUI toolkits, XML >> processing, > ... >> >> >> Alex > > I entirely second that. > > More, I'd heartily welcome an authoritative word on which to > focus on for each category... I hate to see scarce resources > wasted. > Alex also suggested that a revival of the anygui interface would be a Good Thing. I would certainly love to see that. It seems to me that Python should in fact include either anygui or an equivalent to it as part of its core. Then to interface with a given GUI package, it would be necessary to create a wrapper that maps the wrapper's API to that standard Pythonic API. More work for the package maintainers, and not easy to do in some cases, but for the Python community it would be a huge gain. The same argument could be made for the anydbm interface. In both cases, the interface should not hinder the ability of a developer to access any part of the package API, which implies that parameters must be flexible. Maybe this is a strong use case for bunch/data/namespace arguments and return values. -- rzed -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
