Yes, from a easy of use standpoint, I agree that PythonCard is very
high on the list.
Unfortunately there isn't more "activities" as one would like to see.
On the other hand, that's typical of open-source projects. We can
always roll up our sleeves and do it ourselves.
At least the multicolumn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Paul Boddie wrote:
>
> """The figures behind the scenes are quite enlightening for that
> particular page. If you (or community experiences) don't agree with the
>
> rankings (wxPython apparently even easier to learn than PythonCard and
> Tinder, a bunch of Gtk-based too
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:04:57 +0200, Christophe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>> And no modern layout manager available. Only those old school
>>> left/right/up/down pack and anchors are available.
>> huh? when did you last look at Tk? 1994?
> Yesterday. In fact, I could find no mention at all
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> IOWs, eyecandy with no functionality... Sounds like the same mindset
> that creates entire web sites using Flash animations such that one /can
> not/ access them using a simple fast-loading text modes.
>
Not exactly. Look...when you're using freeware to compete w
"Mudcat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > No that would suck. Best to try to stay as close as possible to the
> > native widgets on whatever the underlying platform is. If you want
> > to depart from the native UI, then start from scratch and write a whole
> > new window system with a complete app
Paul Rubin wrote:
>
> No that would suck. Best to try to stay as close as possible to the
> native widgets on whatever the underlying platform is. If you want
> to depart from the native UI, then start from scratch and write a whole
> new window system with a complete app suite etc.
Ok. But ot
Mudcat wrote:
> When you say far better widgets, do you mean that it has a greater
> number of widgets to choose from, or that the types of widgets are
> basically the same but have a greater amount of flexibility in them?
by better i mean more of them to choose from and the functionality they
p
"Mudcat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When you say far better widgets, do you mean that it has a greater
> number of widgets to choose from, or that the types of widgets are
> basically the same but have a greater amount of flexibility in them?
There's a lot more and they look a lot better. Tk w
When you say far better widgets, do you mean that it has a greater
number of widgets to choose from, or that the types of widgets are
basically the same but have a greater amount of flexibility in them?
Personally I find programming in Tkinter fairly simple and
straight-forward. I'm sure a lot of
Mudcat wrote:
> I have been using Tkinter for several years now. Recently I have been
> thinking about switching to something else that may have a sharper
> appearance. However I'm not sure what that may be, and if that
> something else is *that* much better than what I'm already using.
>
> Does e
Mudcat wrote:
> I have been using Tkinter for several years now. Recently I have been
> thinking about switching to something else that may have a sharper
> appearance. However I'm not sure what that may be, and if that
> something else is *that* much better than what I'm already using.
Tk 8.5 is
On 4 Nov 2006 08:23:40 -0800, Mudcat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been using Tkinter for several years now. Recently I have been
> thinking about switching to something else that may have a sharper
> appearance. However I'm not sure what that may be, and if that
> something else is *that* m
I have been using Tkinter for several years now. Recently I have been
thinking about switching to something else that may have a sharper
appearance. However I'm not sure what that may be, and if that
something else is *that* much better than what I'm already using.
Does everyone agree that wxPytho
Christophe napisał(a):
>> PyGtk:
>> Pro: Sophisticated GUI's, cross-platform (Linux and Win32); very popular
>> on some platforms; active development community
>> Con: Not native on OS X
>
> You forgot that it is rather buggy on Win32 ( in my experience )
Didn't observe any W32-specific bugy beh
On Friday 27 October 2006 16:36, Magnus Lycka wrote:
> David Boddie wrote:
>> You're forgetting that Qt isn't just a widget toolkit.
>
> I suspect that the non-GUI parts are (just like in Wx) C++ stuff
> which is more or less equivalent with things that are either Python
> builtins or parts of Pyt
David Boddie wrote:
> You're forgetting that Qt isn't just a widget toolkit.
I suspect that the non-GUI parts are (just like in Wx) C++ stuff
which is more or less equivalent with things that are either Python
builtins or parts of Python's standard library. Besides, getting
those proprietary depen
Stephen Eilert escreveu:
> BartlebyScrivener wrote:
>
>> Well, I am woefully unqualified to speak to the general state of Python
>> gui frameworks, but I am in a similar situation as the OP, i.e., a
>> beginner looking to TRY some easy gui programming in Python. Not being
>> a computer science p
BartlebyScrivener wrote:
> Well, I am woefully unqualified to speak to the general state of Python
> gui frameworks, but I am in a similar situation as the OP, i.e., a
> beginner looking to TRY some easy gui programming in Python. Not being
> a computer science person, just an amateur scripter, I
Well, I am woefully unqualified to speak to the general state of Python
gui frameworks, but I am in a similar situation as the OP, i.e., a
beginner looking to TRY some easy gui programming in Python. Not being
a computer science person, just an amateur scripter, I tend to learn
best from lots of e
Paul Boddie wrote:
> seem to have moved very far, despite Fredrik's efforts: what happened
> to Tkinter 3000 or was that a codename for something else?
the first Tk3K project solved 95% of the problems (*) I had
with Tkinter:
http://effbot.org/zone/wck.htm
(especially when combined with Op
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Well, I don't know what I was thinking, exactly, when I rated
> PythonCard's ease of use...so I went back and changed it to rate it a
> lot higher. The ratings in this script were done a long time ago now
> and I need to re-do them, and add some new categories to rate a
Paul Boddie wrote:
"""The figures behind the scenes are quite enlightening for that
particular page. If you (or community experiences) don't agree with the
rankings (wxPython apparently even easier to learn than PythonCard and
Tinder, a bunch of Gtk-based toolkits having more or less "full" Linux
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Christophe wrote:
> > Even if you consider that the huge time saving you get out of using Qt
> > is worth more than what you pay to acquire a licence?
>
> then it sounds like a combination between "it's a silver bullet!" and
> "commercial software is better than free softwar
Fredrik Lundh a écrit :
> Christophe wrote:
>
Also, the Tkinter API is far less elegant than the others.
>>> huh? create object, display object, create object, display object.
>>> sure looks like plain old Python to me...
>>
>> Let's see :
>>
>> .pack(side = "left")
>> fred = Button(se
Christophe wrote:
>>> Also, the Tkinter API is far less elegant than the others.
>> huh? create object, display object, create object, display object. sure
>> looks like plain old Python to me...
>
> Let's see :
>
> .pack(side = "left")
>
> fred = Button(self, fg = "red", bg = "blue")
> fred[
Christophe wrote:
commercial deployment is expensive; free deployment must be GPL;
>>>
>>> Opinions differ on the first one of these.
>> even if you define "expensive" as "costs more money than the others" ?
>
> Even if you consider that the huge time saving you get out of using Qt
> is wo
Fredrik Lundh a écrit :
> Christophe wrote:
>
>> Also, the Tkinter API is far less elegant than the others.
>
> huh? create object, display object, create object, display object. sure
> looks like plain old Python to me...
Let's see :
.pack(side = "left")
fred = Button(self, fg = "red", bg =
Fredrik Lundh a écrit :
> David Boddie wrote:
>
>>> commercial deployment is expensive; free deployment must be GPL;
>>
>> Opinions differ on the first one of these.
>
> even if you define "expensive" as "costs more money than the others" ?
Even if you consider that the huge time saving you get o
David Boddie wrote:
>> commercial deployment is expensive; free deployment must be GPL;
>
> Opinions differ on the first one of these.
even if you define "expensive" as "costs more money than the others" ?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 17:38, Kevin Walzer wrote:
> PyQt:
> Pro: Powerful, cross-platform, sophisticated GUI's
> Con: Based on C++ toolkit;
That's not a bad thing in itself.
> docs assume knowledge of C++;
Only to a point. I knew Python before I knew C++, and it didn't stop
me from learning
On 24 Oct 2006 16:38:28 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You load dabo and then load your program through dabo... That
> was all I needed to know to disregard it.
Wow - inaccurate and proud of it!
Your loss.
--
# p.d.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-li
I have to say that py-gtk is a pain to install. You have copywrites
with the various parts of the library when you install all of it with
apple and the people that do the pill library. I am looking at
wxwindows and maybe vpython for graphics (If it will do what I want).
wx.grid is a pain thus far
On 10/24/06, Kevin Walzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> wxPython:
> Pro: Popular, actively developed, wraps native widgets, looks great on
> Windows, commercial-friendly license
> Con: Based on C++ toolkit; docs assume knowledge of C++; some think
> coding style is too much like C++; complex to bui
Christophe wrote:
> Kevin Walzer a écrit :
>> Christophe wrote:
>>
>>> Since when is "based on C++ toolkit" a con?
>>>
>>
>> If you don't know C++ (as is the case with me), then it's difficult to
>> do a C++-to-Python translation in looking at code examples.
>
> As if a toolkit based on C would be
Ron Stevens of the Python411 podcast(1) has some good info on these. He
did an entire podcast(2) comparing different Python GUI tools, and did
several others in greater detail, including specifically on wyPython and
Tkinter. You can also subscribe to the RSS feed(3). The main page has
titles for al
Christophe wrote:
> Also, the Tkinter API is far less elegant than the others.
huh? create object, display object, create object, display object.
sure looks like plain old Python to me...
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Kevin Walzer a écrit :
> Christophe wrote:
>
>> Since when is "based on C++ toolkit" a con?
>>
>
> If you don't know C++ (as is the case with me), then it's difficult to
> do a C++-to-Python translation in looking at code examples.
As if a toolkit based on C would be much easier.
In fact, I wou
Christophe wrote:
> Since when is "based on C++ toolkit" a con?
>
If you don't know C++ (as is the case with me), then it's difficult to
do a C++-to-Python translation in looking at code examples.
--
Kevin Walzer
Code by Kevin
http://www.codebykevin.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listi
Kevin Walzer a écrit :
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Now i began to learn GUI programming. There are so many
>> choices of GUI in the python world, wxPython, pyGTK, PyQT,
>> Tkinter, .etc, it's difficult for a novice to decide, however.
>> Can you draw a comparison among them on easy coding, python
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now i began to learn GUI programming. There are so many
> choices of GUI in the python world, wxPython, pyGTK, PyQT,
> Tkinter, .etc, it's difficult for a novice to decide, however.
> Can you draw a comparison among them on easy coding, pythonish design,
> beautiful and g
On 23 Oct 2006 22:07:39 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now i began to learn GUI programming. There are so many
> choices of GUI in the python world, wxPython, pyGTK, PyQT,
> Tkinter, .etc, it's difficult for a novice to decide, however.
> Can you draw a comparison among them
Cameron Walsh wrote:
>
> I googled "python gui compare" a while back and got
> www.awaretek.com/toolkits.html as the first result.
See also the python.org Wiki for more information:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/UsefulModules
http://wiki.python.org/moin/GuiProgramming (big list!)
> Every variation
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now i began to learn GUI programming. There are so many
> choices of GUI in the python world, wxPython, pyGTK, PyQT,
> Tkinter, .etc, it's difficult for a novice to decide, however.
> Can you draw a comparison among them on easy coding, pythonish design,
> beautiful and g
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now i began to learn GUI programming. There are so many
> choices of GUI in the python world, wxPython, pyGTK, PyQT,
> Tkinter, .etc, it's difficult for a novice to decide, however.
> Can you draw a comparison among them on easy coding, pythonish design,
> beautiful and
44 matches
Mail list logo
