Quoting Keith Dart (2012-12-01 08:11:16) > On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 13:56:58 -0500 > Ian Ward <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It's much nicer than what we have right now. > > I'm about to write some tree navigation functionality to my app. So now > I'm wondering if this is the future direction of the urwid API? Should > I get this code now and start using it, or use the original API?
This API is definitely not set in stone. I am hacking on it right now to improve the way stacking of treeboxes can be done. If I were you i'd do other parts of my app first. I'd definitely not spend the time learning about the current Tree API. Also, you can always use it as its now and ship it with your app to ensure a stable API :) @Ian: I am fumbling around with your NestedTreeWalker. The idea is to allow ListBox and TreeBox widgets as nodes and to transparently use only their respective walkers to make a single, outer tree. Keypresses can still be first send to the widgets to make sure customized keypress method in tree/listBoxes are respected.. /p
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ Urwid mailing list [email protected] http://lists.excess.org/mailman/listinfo/urwid
