Hallöchen! Peter Decker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 7/30/05, Torsten Bronger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I've been having a closer look at wxPython which is not Pythonic >> at all and bad documented. 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. > > I had the exact same impression when I started working with > wxPython: [...] I then discovered Dabo (http://dabodev.com), which > is a full application framework, but whose UI layer is a very > Pythonic wrapper around wxPython. I've created several apps now > using Dabo, even though I haven't even looked at the data > connectivity aspects of it; the UI code works fine without it. I'm aware of it (and there is Wax and maybe a third one). Actually it illustrates my point quite well: These projects are small and instable (Dabo has a developer basis of very few people, Wax has only one); they are even worse documented; they add another layer which slows down and requires the end-user to install another package; they force you to test even more GUI approaches. ==> They contribute heavily to Dark Cowherd's observation that "it is shambles". Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
