On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 02:33:05 -0400, Peter Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Jp Calderone wrote: >> In the particular case of wxWidgets, it turns out that the *GUI* blocks >> for long periods of time, preventing the *network* from getting >> attention. But I agree with your position for other toolkits, such as >> Gtk, Qt, or Tk. > >Are you simply showing that there are two points of view here, that one >can look at the wx main loop as being "blocking", waiting for I/O, even >though it is simply doing asynchronous event-driven processing the same >as Twisted? Or am I missing something? Allowing for the fact that wx >blocks, not just for long periods of time, but *indefinitely* (as long >as no events are arriving) I still don't see how that makes it different >from Twisted or from any other typical GUI framework, which do exactly >the same thing. (And since there is even a wxPython main loop >integrated with and provided in Twisted, surely you aren't arguing that >what wx does is somehow unusual or bad.)
Providing wx support in Twisted has been orders of magnitude more difficult than providing Tk, Qt, or Gtk support has been. And wxsupport and wxreactor are each broken in slightly different ways, so I wouldn't say we've been successful, either. Blocking inside the mainloop while waiting for events is fine. It's blocking elsewhere that is problematic. Jp -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
