On Wednesday 05 December 2007 6:36 pm, johnf wrote: > > In answer to those of list that have questioned the coding of the tutorial > here's where I'm coming from. > > I recall when I first started my search for a VFP replacement. I came upon > Python. After reading a little, checking out tutorials I determined that > it was worth added research. It wasn't long before I found GNUe, > pythoncard, boa, pyQT, and others. But reading the descriptions of those > tools told me I would have to write my own framework if I really wanted a > replacement for VFP. I made my decision not to use those tools without > clearly knowing python. But I kept my eyes on python and it wasn't to > long before I found Dabo. It wasn't until I found Dabo that I purchased my > first book on python. So I knew nothing about python - other than it was > easy to read and used namespaces when I started. > > But I made a mistake - I tried to follow the code in AppWizard. That was > so far over my head that I was going to give up on the whole python > language. The only reason I did not was the belief I had in two guys from > the VFP world. They must be doing something that works like VFP I said to > myself. It wasn't long before I started understanding - but believe me I > did not start out knowing python (not that I do now). > > If you ask windows programmers what they know about python most will tell > you "nothing at all". Some don't even know that python is a computer > language. If you don't agree on this point tell me why so many of our > newbies are having difficulty installing Dabo. The install is very > straight forward and follows standard python install practices. > > And aren't we trying to encourage VFP, VB programmers to review Dabo. But > if the requirement is they already know Python or ability to look up stuff > like how the built-in modules work before getting involved with Dabo - how > do we get those VFP and VB programmers? Therefore, I stand by my easy to > read code vs coding it the right way. Also my request for the side bar > information was to make sure that the tutorial did in fact provide the > information on the "right way". > > So if takes a little python training to help newbies understand Dabo - why > not provide it?
I'm with you on this. I see these messages to the list as a rough draft. The final polish can be added once they migrate to the Wiki. The topic being covered is broad and deep. In fact a book could be written on what you are trying to do. Even assuming you stuck to the 'Python' way there would still be more than one way to get to the end result, i.e. the multiple methods to bind an event. At this point I for one am more interested in the process than the hairy details. Once I see a path from start to finish than it will be time to hash out the details. It is my experience that coding/writing/building is an iterative process. You start with a broad outline and then progressively fill in the gaps. Keep up the good work. I am waiting with baited breath for the section on biz objects. Thanks, -- Adrian Klaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/dabo-users/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
