On Tuesday, July 9, 2013 1:03:14 AM UTC-4, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:46 PM, CM <cmpyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Target the three most popular desktop platforms all at once, no
>
> >> Linux/Windows/Mac OS versioning.
>
> > Ehhh... There are differences, in, e.g., wxPython between the three
> > platforms, and you can either do different versions or, more aptly, just
> > fix these differences in your code with conditional statements ("if this is
> > Win, do this, else do that").
>
>
>
> Please watch your citations, you quoted several different people
> without any hint as to who said what :)
Uhp, sorry. I was just trimming for space, but good point.
> Yes, there are a few differences. But a *lot* less than there are
> differences between a Linux executable and a Windows one, or between
> 32-bit and 64-bit binaries, or between Red Hat and Debian packages,
> etc, etc, etc. Differences in windowing systems or newlines or pat
> separators will need to be dealt with regardless of the app, but there
> are a whole pile of additional differences when you distribute binary
> executables.
Agreed. That said, some of whether it is worth the trouble will depend on
whether the OP (or whoever) is planning to deploy for all these platforms. If
it is just the big three, then it will be some (significant) work at first to
get the executables made, but then, with some luck, less work to maintain the
various platform versions.
But sure, I am not at all disputing the idea that if you have, say, a Python
program with wxPython, and the user is easily willing to install (or already
has) Python and wxPython, to just send the .py file. It would be ludicrous to
not do that.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
