Do other Python GUI toolkits require this?

[Diez B. Roggisch]

Antoon Pardon schrieb:
> On 2007-04-19, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
>> Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>> On 2007-04-19, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
>>>> Michael Bentley wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 19, 2007, at 4:11 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2007-04-19, Michael Bentley <michael at jedimindworks.com> wrote:
>>>> [...]  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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Perhaps in Belgium they prefer climbing mountains over walking up and 
>>>> down gentle hills? Or possibly they will simply pick any nit that is 
>>>> carelessly left within range?
>>> If it is just a nit, why don't you ignore my remark as I suggested?
>>>
>> Because I suffer from the quixotic urge to help stamp out obsessive 
>> compulsive behavior on c.l.py? This is self-defeating, of course, since 
>> it makes me appear obsessive compulsive in my own right ...
>>
>>> Now suppose I give you a graph that shows you how different people
>>> are making progress. Would you prefer the rather flat curves instead
>>> of the steep curves because the latter gives you the idea of someone
>>> having to conquer huge obstacles or would you choose the steep curve
>>> because they show you someone is getting results fast?
>>>
>> Suppose I should you a hill you have to climb? Would you rather don 
>> mountain boots and crampons to climb 3,000 feet up a vertical cliff or 
>> would you rather amble up, say, Ben Lomond with the other tourists?
> 
> So if you have the choice between a steep or a shalow income curve
> you will prefer the shalow curve because a steep curve makes you
> think about verticale clifs and such?
> 
> The analogy with a walk is just silly because curves are not like walks.
> Nobody will say something like: I won't invest in that company because
> it has a steep profit curve or the reverse: I'll invest in this company
> because it has an easy looking downhill going profit curve.

Your whole argumentation bases on the fact that the result of the 
learning process, and the success of it, has something to do with the 
reached height - or y-axis-value - of your climb.

Which is nonsense. The goal is to go from A - ignorance - to B - 
knowledge - which both lie on the X-Axis.

And you really argue that having to go 2 miles OVER THE GROUND on a 
shallow slope is worse than walking 2 miles OVER GROUND with the mount 
everest between you and your goal?

Diez