On 2005-09-13, Peter Decker <pydecker at gmail.com> wrote:
[regarding wxGTK vs wxPython]
> I looked at both, and preferred wxPython's look. I hated its
> C-like feeling, with some very un-Pythonic code that failed to
> hide its C roots very well, but I used it because the results
> were so good.
>
> Since then I've discovered Dabo, which is a complete
> application framework, and which wraps wxPython for its UI.
> Apparently, the authors of Dabo also didn't like the style of
> wxPython code, and have created their own classes that expose
> a cleaner, much more Pythonic API.
Yea, the wxPython API is pretty clunky in a few areas due to
the fact that it's a pretty thin wrapper around a C API. Don't
get me started about that silly ID parameter. I've been using
wxPython for 3-4 years, and have _never_ passed an ID other
than -1. That tells you something in the API is fundamentally
wrong. The whole bit-mapped "flag" parameter is nasty as well
(not to mention the fact that since it contains more than one
boolean value the parameter should have been named 'flags'
rather than 'flag'.
Anyway, there are some lighter-weight wrappers that make the
API more Pythonic and hide the nasty stuff like the id and flag
parameters. I tried "wax" a while back and it looked
promising.
> I've been using Dabo for some small GUI apps, and I still
> can't believe how much easier it is to create the UI with Dabo
> than with plain wxPython. You should definitely check it out
> if you decide to go the wxPython route.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Here I am at the flea
at market but nobody is buying
visi.com my urine sample bottles...