Do other Python GUI toolkits require this?

[Antoon Pardon]

On 2007-04-19, Wayne Brehaut <wbrehaut at mcsnet.ca> wrote:
> On 19 Apr 2007 10:54:20 GMT, Antoon Pardon <apardon at forel.vub.ac.be>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2007-04-19, Michael Bentley <michael at jedimindworks.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 19, 2007, at 4:11 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2007-04-19, Michael Bentley <michael at jedimindworks.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> PyObjC is pretty slick (and since Ronald hasn't made any commits in a
>>>>> while I'm nearly certain it'll show up in the next official
>>>>> distribution of the devtools). About the time you gave up on PyQt on
>>>>> the Mac and switched over to Tkinter, I switched to PyObjC.  The
>>>>> learning curve is rather steep IMO, but worth it.
>>>>
>>>> Just a throw in remark, that  you may ignore if you wish, but a steep
>>>> learning curve means that the subject is easily familiarized and that
>>>> the learning period is short.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to use it as if it is the opposite.
>>>
>>> Mathematical absurdities aside, it's the common usage -- but perhaps  
>>> you knew that.
>>
>>I don't know how you come to the conclusion that it is a mathematical
>>absurdity but consider this: If you find that common usage propagates
>>something that is incorrect, should we just shrug it off or should we
>>attemp a correction? There is always a chance that one day you find
>>yourself exposed to a learning curve while going through a document.
>>If you just depend on common usage you will probably draw the wrong
>>conclusion.
>
> The only way one could assume the "common usage" to be a mathematical
> absurdity would be not to think about it or not to have much
> mathematical insight or "maturity".  Is a vertical cliff not steep no
> matter how high it is?  And is a gentle grade (say <= 10%) not
> un-steep no matter how long it is?  Is the slope of a curve dependent
> on its length?
>
> So the remark that " a steep learning curve means that the subject is
> easily familiarized and that the learning period is short" is
> completely incorrect on two points (i.e., all points that are
> relevant): first, steep always implies much to learn in a relatively
> short time (what else could the slope of a curve possibly mean
> "mathematicallY" or logically?);

No it doesn't imply that at all. A learning curve doesn't show some
goal of a person who was given just so much time to familiarize himself
with some material. A learning curve shows the progres that is made
in familiarizing one self while studying. A steep curve means a
lot of actual learning in a short time.

> second, steepness is independent of
> length, so "steep" has no implication in general about how long the
> learning curve will be--on the contrary, in fact, it's quite possible
> that a learning curve will never have any great challenges (steep
> portions) but be only a very long gradual process--as the learning of
> many natural languages is.

That doesn't contradict that if one language has a steeper curve to
learn than a second. Familiarisation with the first language will
be faster and easier than with the second.

> A learning curve is conventionally the graph of a function of
> "quantity to be learned" vs. time,

No it doesn't. A learning curve is the graph that somehow quantifies
what is actually learned vs time.

-- 
Antoon Pardon