On 2009-11-10, at 22:07, Greg Ewing wrote:
> So, I'd say that, like democracy, [IDLE is] not very good, but
> it's better than any of the alternatives. :-)
Speaking purely as a Python user, I am very happy that IDLE is part of the
Python distribution. Personally, I use and like emacs too much, and have no use
for IDLE for my own programming at all. But I have taught a lot of Python
classes, and being able to tell the IT staff `please install Python x.y on the
machines in the lab', and then knowing that students have everything they need
to do their lab work, is a major plus. (I found that many of the students
stayed with IDLE even after their course was over, too.)
As a side observation, I think the main reasons why Tk is so resistant to
removal from Python (and several other dynamic languages) is that its
developers took very seriously the idea of being lightweight and portable,
while many other toolkits grew more and more complex. Not all GUI toolkits are
like that; I have nice things to say about FLTK, for example. Perhaps one day
somebody will do a revision of Tk (sans Tcl) for the 21st century, but until
then, Greg's Winston Churchill quote applies not just to IDLE but also to Tk.
[`This horse is dead, please stop flogging it.' `No it's not, it's just
observing the moratorium']
-- v
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
