On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 02:11:03AM -0800, Marc Tompkins wrote: > on, and its idiom felt more comfortable to me than the others. Also, unlike > Qt, it's free... I hate to be a cheapskate, but I'm a very small business > and I need to put food on my family, so the Qt license is a major hurdle.
But since 2005, according to wikipedia, the Qt Windows is also licensed under the GPL. Am I missing something? > <rant> > I have to say, though, that as a recovering Visual Studio user there is one > thing - believe me, it's the only thing! - I miss, and that's an > honest-to-goodness WYSIWYG GUI designer. For the love of Pete, if Microsoft > can get it right - and it's the only thing they did get right, IMHO - why > can't we? Why can't you just draw your GUI on the screen and concentrate on > the actual functionality in peace? It's why I finally started using Qt. In fact I do not really like WYSIWYG designers - I always remember html produced by Dreamweaver and co. - but qtdesigner + pyuic (see pyqt) always gave me readable code. Tiago Saboga. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
