How standard is the standard library?
Newbie question: Looking through my stack of books and various on-line references, I have seen several libraries and library functions listed as depreciated. Is there a road map or concrete list of what parts of the standard library are to be considered reliable and permanent? Coming from C, I am used to library functions being set in stone. Can I reasonably expect that code using, for instance xml.dom.minidom will still work in 10 years? Do all depreciated libraries print warnings when they are imported? I see that if I print xmllib, I get the message "The xmllib module is obsolete. Use xml.sax instead." Is this behavior followed consistently, to give a "this code might not work come this time next year" warning? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: PyGTK vs. wxPython
dcrespo wrote: Hi all... I think wxPython is much better than PyGTK. First of all, PyGTK needs the GTK runtime installed, whereas wxPython is entirely Python's And depending on your platform, wxPython also requires GTK installed. wxWindows is a wrapper for different GUI toolkits. On Windows, it uses the native API. On Linux, it tries to use GTK but fails to work most of the time. wxPython would indeed be a better choice if your applications are only to run on a certain infamous legacy operating system from the Pacific Northwest. The PyGTK is a better choice if you are writing for Linux and want your application to also be able to run on windows. wxWindows is *extremely* buggy on Linux where it is just a poor wrapper for the GTK toolkit. In my experience, most supposedly portable multi platform applications built around wxWindows which are supposed to run on Linux simply don't run at all. Personally, I have no need to write for Windows [or any way to test such code]. I know that the GTK toolkit is available for Windows, and also now for OS X without the need for an X server. Just my $0.02 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Can .py be complied?
Harlin Seritt wrote: Hi monkey, Not a stupid question especially if you're trying to create commercial software and don't want to reveal your source. At any rate, you can use py2exe to create a .exe file. It does have some cons to it since you Some very severe cons considering that would mean his code would only run on a certain infamous legacy operating system that will remain unnamed. The last I checked, ".exe" files were rather useless on most operating systems. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Can .py be complied?
python -o foo.exe foo.py at the command line, and get an executable, without any further effort. Hence making the resulting program useless to users of most operating systems. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
