Re: Pythonic cross-platform GUI desingers à la Interface Builder (Re: what gui designer is everyone using)

[Rick Johnson]

On Jun 10, 11:05 pm, rusi <rustompm... at gmail.com> wrote:

> If python is really a "language maven's" language then it does not do
> very well:
> - its not as object-oriented as Ruby (or other arcana like Eiffel)
if it were object-oreiented as Ruby, then why not use Ruby?

> - its not as functional as Haskell
if it were as functional as Haskell, then why not use Haskell?

> - its not as integrable as Lua
if it were as integrable as Lua, then why not use Lua?

> - its not as close-to-bare-metal as C
if it were as asinine as C, then why not use C?

> - etc
exactly!

> Then why is it up-there among our most popular languages? Because of
> the 'batteries included.'

No. It's up there because it does not FORCE you to program in a single
paradigm. Look. I love OOP. It works well for so many problems -- but
not for ALL problems! I like the freedom i have when using Python. I
don't get that feeling anywhere else.

> And not having a good gui-builder is a battery (cell?) that is
> lacking.

Nonsense. I'm not saying we should NEVER have a visual gui builder,
no,  but i am saying that we don't need one to be a great language.