up with PyGUI!

[Ed Leafe]

On Sep 25, 2004, at 6:31 PM, Carlos Ribeiro wrote:

> You are missing the point. There is an important difference between
> "imperative" and "declarative". Both are explicit -- the only thing
> that is implicit in the declarative version is the way the class
> declaration is going to be processed by the metaclass constructor.

	Sorry, but it just doesn't seem explicit to me. Defining a class 
doesn't mean instantiating one instance of a class at the place where 
the class is defined, but that seems to be exactly what your metaclass 
constructor does.

	Perhaps Python lacks the syntax - if it had an 'instance' keyword 
instead of forcing you to use 'class', it might be clearer.

> The same form description can
> be used with multiple target environments much easier than an
> imperative version. It isolates the description of what you want from
> the actual implementation for the target environment.

	Again, I don't see how it is any different. I can use either style 
with multiple targets, and add logic to either to get different effects 
in each environment.

> To some extent, the choice between declarative and imperative styles
> is a matter of personal taste.
	
	The impression that I am getting is that it's purely a matter of taste.

> But also, it's about how to model
> problems using programming languages. There's a reason why some people
> use functional or declarative languages instead of imperative ones. As
> such, we may be forcing Python's syntactic limits by using it for this
> type of stuff.

	Exactly. 'Class' has a specific meaning in Python. It does not mean 
'contained instance'.

> That's why I'm calling this an **experiment**. We need
> to have something to work with for some time to check if we are
> productive and if we feel comfortablee with the way we're working.

	I understand that it's an experiment. My question is if the goal of 
this experiment is just to do something differently, or if there is an 
ultimate benefit that one can hope to gain if the experiment is a 
success. I see what you're doing and how it is different; I guess I 
still don't see that this is gaining any power or flexibility.

> As such, I invite you to try it a little bit, and to see how does it
> fit into your programming environment. I'm not in a hurry -- I just
> want to do it right and to make something useful. And you can rest
> assured that your observations are being taken with the most respect
> and interest on my part.

	My problem is that I am in a 'hurry': I need to continue to develop 
Dabo, and make it as powerful and flexible for our users as it can be. 
I am interested in any alternatives that would benefit our users; my 
curiosity is about the payoff for adopting an alternative approach such 
as yours. If such a payoff isn't there, I can't spend a lot of time 
pursuing it. That's why I'm constantly asking you to explain the 
benefit, not just the theory, behind this idea.

      ___/
     /
    __/
   /
  ____/
  Ed Leafe
  http://leafe.com/
  http://dabodev.com/