On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 08:54:59 +0200, Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hallöchen! > >Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> The choice is GUI toolkits is largely seperate from >> Python. Consider that they are just bindings to libraries that are >> developed completely seperate of the language. GUI is should be >> seperate from the language, and thus not bound to same >> expectations and desires as elements of the language itself. > >I disagree. A modern language must provide a convenient and >well-embedded way to write GUI applications. This is not a sign of >decadence, but a very good promotional argument. Delphi and first >and foremost VB are extremely popular, and it's sad to see that >Python could get a lot more of the cake if the efforts for IDEs and >toolkits were somewhat streamlined. Besides, all other already good >aspects of Python wouldn't suffer at all. > >Tkinter fits into Python very well and it is very easily (if not >trivially) accessible for users of our applications. People >complain about non-native look-and-feel on Windows, but sorry, I >simply find it unacceptably ugly on all platforms. Don't >misunderstand me: I don't like neat GUI effects just for the sake of >it but Tkinter makes an outdated impression on the end-user. > >I've been having a closer look at wxPython which is not Pythonic at >all and bad documented.
Tkinter is hardly brilliantly documented, IMO. > Probably I'll use it nevertheless. PyGTK >and PyQt may have their own advantages and disadvantages. > >However, in my opinion we don't need yet another binding so thin >that C or C++ is shining through, but a modern replacement for >Tkinter with its Pythonic way of thinking. How about sometihing with the same API as Tkinter (so no need to relearn), but which looks prettier? Would that fix your gripes? -- Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
