On Dec 27, 7:20 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 27, 12:29 am, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 26, 2007 10:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Instead of remaking the wheel for a sage client side application, one
> > > possibility would be to use something like QT 4 + webkit (webkit is
> > > the browser engine derived from konqueror's KHTML and used in OS X's
> > > Safari browser). Functionality from the notebook could be directly
> > > used via webkit, and additional functionality could be added elsewhere
> > > if it doesn't make sense to have it in the notebook. QT is cross
> > > platform and open source, and there is a python language binding
> > > (PyQT) that seems actively developed. Also, for what it is worth,
> > > I've never seen so many developers speak so highly of a GUI toolkit as
> > > I have seen for QT (I have little experience myself other than as a
> > > user of many great QT applications).
>
> > > For a recent review including QT/webkit, see:
> > >http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071226-first-look-qt-4-4-0-wit...
>
> > > I almost certainly won't have time to work on this much myself in the
> > > near future, but thought I'd pass on the idea if anyone is very eager
> > > to make a GUI that feels like an enhanced version of one of the
> > > popular CAS environments. It isn't something I really need, but I
> > > suppose quite a few people might like it.
>
> > Any chance you could be more precise, or describe some examples
> > of exactly what you mean? Are there any nontrivial GUI applications
> > that are written the way you are describing above.
>
> I doubt it, since QT 4.4 hasn't been released yet and will be the
> first version with webkit integration. On MS Windows I've seen a
> number of applications that like to integrate Internet Explorer in
> this fashion, though I can't remember any nontrivial examples.> If we don't
> "remake the wheel for a sage client side application,"
> > what would be the advantage of what you describe above over just using the
> > Sage notebook via Firefox or Konqueror or Safari? I'm not being
> > rhetorical;
> > it's just that what you're suggesting is a bit too abstract for me.
>
> Using something native like QT could provide faster widgets than AJAX,
> and also allow for an integrated environment for some visualization
> libraries that cannot be accessed from the notebook. You could
> distribute the client side application as a separate package with the
> visualization libraries and any other client side libraries/
> applications that can't be used from the notebook, then connect
> remotely to a sage notebook server. I understand it is best to get as
> much functionality in the notebook as possible, but usability could be
> enhanced via fast widgets, menus, and extra libraries included as one
> integrated application.
>
> > Also, does this webkit have a completely javascript interpreter?
>
> Looks like it isn't completely ECMAscript compliant, but is getting
> there fast. Last I heard it supported some fairly complex AJAX apps
> (like gmail), but I haven't tested it much myself - I usually use
> firefox and opera these days.
>
> > Sorry if I sound completely clueless.
>
> Nope, I'm not sure if it would be worthwhile - I have yet to use many
> of the visualization tools in sage, so I'm the clueless one here.
I also see this potentially as a application that could be used more
to actually debug code. It seems like the python debugger (http://
docs.python.org/lib/module-pdb.html) might be something that could be
integrated.
> > -- William
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
