Brian Brown wrote: > On Mar 1, 2006, at 11:42 AM, Michael Foord wrote: > > >> Ed Blake wrote: >> >>> [snip..] >>> >>>> did you manage to get wx running? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I never really tried. Every time I look at Wx it goes the same way: >>> I check out the demos and am wowed by the great widgets/events/ >>> applications >>> it can handle, then I check out the code and find that it is >>> obtuse, sparsely >>> commented (for example code), and generally confusing... >>> >>> Last time I checked out Wx (~ 2 Mo. ago) things were put together >>> better, and >>> the documentation was becoming rather good/complete. It just >>> doesn't do >>> anything which would compel me to switch though, and it seems >>> rather more >>> complicated than Tkinter. >>> >>> >> You ought to check out Wax. It's a friendly Pythonic layer that sits >> atop of wx and IMHO is just as easy to use as Tkinter. >> > > Well, there is also our skinning framework - you specify the GUI in > XML, but inline python is a major part of it. It was designed to > allow sending an functional GUI page over jabber or some other > transport. There are a lot of other interesting tools at the project > as well: http://www.techgame.net/projects/framework > > Get it and check out the demos. >
Wow, looks interesting. With a Python stub on the client program you can dynamically serve applications. That all depends on how good your XML skinning protocol is of course. ;-) I wonder if it would still work with Wax... just thinking aloud. Anyway, I'll take a look at it. All the best, Fuzzyman http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml > Brian > > btw, it's BSD licensed. > > _______________________________________________ > PythonCE mailing list > PythonCE@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonce > > _______________________________________________ PythonCE mailing list PythonCE@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonce
