On 2023-04-24, Michael Torrie <torr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/21/23 15:57, Barry wrote: > >> Maybe this, recently lwn.net article, >> https://textual.textualize.io/ I was planning to check it out. > > Textual definitely looks slick and modern. And with a modern > terminal emulator it works quite well and is responsive. I'd > definitely consider it for a TUI. > > But on the Linux console, or on an older terminal, not so much. > Textual's really designed for smallish unicode fonts in a windowed > environment, not any kind of real, old-school text mode. Just > something to keep in mind. 99% of terminal users are using a modern > terminal emulator these days, with full color and unicode, which is > the target of textual.
Is putty running on Windows a "modern terminal emulator" in this context? After observing some of the local IT types work, I suspect that will be a common use-case for the app I'm working on. > Curses-based programs don't look great on anything, but they do look > consistent on more primitive terminals. The other big advantage of an ncurses program is that since curses support is in the std library, a curses app is simpler to distribute. Right now, the application is a single .py file you just copy to the destination machine and run. It supports command-line use and a Tk GUI. I can add an ncurses "CUI" without having to either adopt a more complex bundling mechanism that requires it to be "installed" or require that users install dependencies via pip/apt/yum/whatever. -- Grant -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
