Hi Ed & All, On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Ed Leafe wrote: > On Jun 12, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Andrea Gavana wrote: > >>> And on a personal note: I find it *buttugly*. >> >> Do you mind explaining "why" you find it *buttugly*? I am asking just >> out of curiosity, obviously. I am so biased towards wxPython that I >> won't make any comment on this thread in particular, but I am curious >> to know why some people find it "ugly" or "bad" or whatever. It has >> its own bugs and missing features, of course, but it is one of the >> major GUI player in the arena, together with PyQt and PyGTK. > > Perhaps he meant the code, and not the results?
Maybe. But I remember a nice quote made in the past by Roger Binns (4 years ago): """ The other thing I failed to mention is that the wxPython API isn't very Pythonic. (This doesn't matter to people like me who are used to GUI programming - the wxPython API is very much in the normal style for GUI APIs.) """ Whether the wxPython style is "Pythonic" or not (whatever "Pythonic" means), this is a one-degree-above-insignificant issue for me. What I care is the eye pleasing look of my apps and how easy it is to code with a GUI framework. wxPython gives me both, the rest is just academic discussion. But I don't want to start another GUI war, let's save the bandwidth... there are plenty of GUI frameworks around, every newbie in the GUI world should try them and stick with the one he/she feels more confortable with. Andrea. "Imagination Is The Only Weapon In The War Against Reality." http://xoomer.alice.it/infinity77/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
