Popularising wxPython

As a new user some features i would have really liked would be:
1.Something like NetBeans for Java should be there.I know there is wxGlade but,Netbeans does all for you,whereas with wxGlade you first make the form and then code.
2.If some sort of language converter could have been there,so that all programmers code in wxPython and using this tool their code in wxWidgets gets done.This would make wxPython a dream GUI toolkit
3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will like wxPython even more

These might be impractical,but that would help make wxPython the most used GUI for sure.
BTW Robin and co are doing a great job.i could never imagine talking via mail to creator of VB or VC++ or NetBeans,but Robin and co are awesome.
If there is anyway i may help,please tell.I have developed a special love for opensource

Hello,

for an IDE check this: (laste night version has wxpython code generation)

http://wxformbuilder.org/

Mario

···

2009/9/9 nipun batra nipunreddevil@gmail.com

As a new user some features i would have really liked would be:
1.Something like NetBeans for Java should be there.I know there is wxGlade but,Netbeans does all for you,whereas with wxGlade you first make the form and then code.

2.If some sort of language converter could have been there,so that all programmers code in wxPython and using this tool their code in wxWidgets gets done.This would make wxPython a dream GUI toolkit
3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will like wxPython even more

These might be impractical,but that would help make wxPython the most used GUI for sure.
BTW Robin and co are doing a great job.i could never imagine talking via mail to creator of VB or VC++ or NetBeans,but Robin and co are awesome.

If there is anyway i may help,please tell.I have developed a special love for opensource


Saludos / Best regards

Mario Lacunza
Software Architect - Webmaster

Website: http://www.lacunza.biz
Email: mlacunza [AT] gmail [DOT] com

Lima - Peru

As a new user some features i would have really liked would be:
1.Something like NetBeans for Java should be there.I know there is wxGlade but,Netbeans does all for you,whereas with wxGlade you first make the form and then code.

2.If some sort of language converter could have been there,so that all programmers code in wxPython and using this tool their code in wxWidgets gets done.This would make wxPython a dream GUI toolkit

Between wxGlade and Boa Constructor, you get about half way there…I personally like hand coding stuff though.

3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will like wxPython even more

This is an interesting idea…I may have to look into it although I don’t know where I would put it if I did…

These might be impractical,but that would help make wxPython the most used GUI for sure.
BTW Robin and co are doing a great job.i could never imagine talking via mail to creator of VB or VC++ or NetBeans,but Robin and co are awesome.

If there is anyway i may help,please tell.I have developed a special love for opensource

Being able to talk to Robin and the other widget creators is definitely one of the best “features” of wxPython. Plus, the rest of the people on the list tend to be helpful rather than annoying compared to many of the other large Python mailing lists.

···

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:08 PM, nipun batra nipunreddevil@gmail.com wrote:


Mike Driscoll

Blog: http://blog.pythonlibrary.org

wxFormBuilder seems very pleasing to the eyes.When will latest build be available in Synaptic

@Mike
Ya people here are very helpful and i have more progress in 2 days with wx than i did in 2 months with other python toolkits

1.Something like NetBeans for Java should be there.I know there is wxGlade
but,Netbeans does all for you,whereas with wxGlade you first make the form
and then code.

I haven't used NetBeans, so I don't know what it means for it to do it "all"
for you beyond what wxGlade can do. But Boa Constructor will allow you
to design the GUI, layout with sizers, connect events, and then all of the
IDE code-editing support most would want for the non-GUI part of the app.,
and it writes it in wxPython code. Since you are using Linux it seems,
there are about 3 problems (at least I have had with 64 bit Ubuntu) w/ Boa
that I've noticed, but not too awful, and I could help if you were interested
in trying it out. Many people are put off of Boa because it has not been
updated in quite a while and the web page is 5+ years out of date, so I
made some video tutorials to help people understand what was possible
and how to get up and running w/ Boa. I've enjoyed using it.
http://showmedo.com/videos/series?name=wKQrywla5

The problems w/ Boa on Linux are listed at the end of this email.

3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately
explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will
like wxPython even more

Online demos? A real *demo*, meaning you could interact with the controls,
would be a lot of work--it would really be a translation of wxpython into
javascript, thereby making a web-based way to do wxPython. That would
be great, and maybe could be done using pyjamas or something, but I would
think it would be a major thing to pull off (though certainly welcome). Video
clips would be easier, but still a lot of labor and not really a demo, either.
If you just mean a nice online "restaurant menu" of what wxPython can do,
that would be nice but I'm not sure it is worth the effort considering that
a person can rather quickly just download wxPython and its demo and
be checking out the widgets/code/description in 5 minutes.

Che

···

-------
PROBLEMS WITH BOA CONSTRUCTOR ON LINUX (for me at least):

- The File -> New option is cut off in the menu. But
that can be gotten around by using the Palette to choose
the same options.

- No gridlines in the Frame Designer (makes it harder
  to use)

- Some problems with the height of the rows in the
  Inspector, at least with 64 bit Ubuntu, some of which
  can be fixed with this workaround:

  and there is a note there saying it has been patched
  in a 0.6.1-6 version in a Debian repository. Haven't tried.

3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately
explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will
like wxPython even more

In re-reading that, now I think you just mean each widget's demo would be
separate and have an online write-up near the download link. I for one would
rather just download the whole thing, and know I have everything in there and
can search it, rather than downloading many dozens of widget demos one at
a time.

If I am not mistaking that is kind of what the wiki is there for.

Cody

···

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:08 PM, nipun batra <nipunreddevil@gmail.com> wrote:

3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately
explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will
like wxPython even more

Mike Driscoll wrote:

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:08 PM, nipun batra <nipunreddevil@gmail.com 3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website
    separately explaining more about each with screenshots,people
    especially newbies will like wxPython even more

This is an interesting idea...I may have to look into it although I don't know where I would put it if I did...

The wiki -- there are already some there, and there sure could be more -- I have a bunch of little ones, but don't have the time to make a Wiki page for each -- ti would be a good learning project for someone, though!

    If there is anyway i may help,please tell.I have developed a special
    love for opensource

As above -- as you learn something, make a small demo and put it up n th e Wiki.

Also, you could go through the Wiki and make sure everything still works right with modern versions (I know I've put stuff up there years ago that I have not maintained), and that the explanations are clear.

-Chris

···

--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer

Emergency Response Division
NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice
7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax
Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception

Chris.Barker@noaa.gov

C M wrote:

1.Something like NetBeans for Java should be there.I know there is wxGlade
but,Netbeans does all for you,whereas with wxGlade you first make the form
and then code.

I haven't used NetBeans, so I don't know what it means for it to do it "all"
for you beyond what wxGlade can do. But Boa Constructor will allow you
to design the GUI, layout with sizers, connect events, and then all of the
IDE code-editing support most would want for the non-GUI part of the app.,
and it writes it in wxPython code. Since you are using Linux it seems,
there are about 3 problems (at least I have had with 64 bit Ubuntu) w/ Boa
that I've noticed, but not too awful, and I could help if you were interested
in trying it out. Many people are put off of Boa because it has not been
updated in quite a while and the web page is 5+ years out of date, so I
made some video tutorials to help people understand what was possible
and how to get up and running w/ Boa. I've enjoyed using it.
ShowMeDo Video Tutorials | showmedo.com

That's a good series of videos. Thanks for doing that.

···

--
Robin Dunn
Software Craftsman

The Wing IDE is pretty good too.

http://www.wingware.com/products

···

On Sep 10, 12:20 am, Mario Lacunza <mlacu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

for an IDE check this: (laste night version has wxpython code generation)

http://wxformbuilder.org/

Mario

2009/9/9 nipun batra <nipunredde...@gmail.com>

> As a new user some features i would have really liked would be:
> 1.Something like NetBeans for Java should be there.I know there is wxGlade
> but,Netbeans does all for you,whereas with wxGlade you first make the form
> and then code.
> 2.If some sort of language converter could have been there,so that all
> programmers code in wxPython and using this tool their code in wxWidgets
> gets done.This would make wxPython a dream GUI toolkit
> 3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately
> explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will
> like wxPython even more

> These might be impractical,but that would help make wxPython the most used
> GUI for sure.
> BTW Robin and co are doing a great job.i could never imagine talking via
> mail to creator of VB or VC++ or NetBeans,but Robin and co are awesome.
> If there is anyway i may help,please tell.I have developed a special love
> for opensource

--
Saludos / Best regards

Mario Lacunza
Software Architect - Webmaster

Website:http://www.lacunza.biz
Email: mlacunza [AT] gmail [DOT] com
Lima - Peru

But Wing IDE is not free,so that kills the whole purpose.Though it is very professional.So we have 3 choices:
1.Boa
2.wxGlade
3.wxForm

Oh, you’re way off. There are TONS of other IDEs out there. Those three you mentioned are just designed specifically for wxPython programming whereas Wing and the ones in the following list are more general purpose:

http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonEditors

···

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:02 PM, nipun batra nipunreddevil@gmail.com wrote:

But Wing IDE is not free,so that kills the whole purpose.Though it is very professional.So we have 3 choices:
1.Boa
2.wxGlade
3.wxForm


Mike Driscoll

Blog: http://blog.pythonlibrary.org

Sir,
I meant wxPython IDE’s only

Java rules mainly due to NetBeans thats what i feel.
And we wxPython community could do our bit,if we have with us an equally good IDE(for wxPython)

Is Python code to c/c++ code a practical idea?

Sir,
I meant wxPython IDE's only

I'm no expert on the terminology, but I'm not sure if "wxPython IDE"
makes sense. As I understand it, an IDE itself is the code editing
support parts, like syntax highlighting, code folding, code completion,
etc. When one uses a Python IDE/code editor and imports the wx
module in the code, one then has code completion for all the methods
of wxPython. But some IDEs also have a GUI builder/designer, and
*that* has to be able to display the widgets of wxPython in the
designer session and translate that into the GUI toolkit code.

btw, Stef Mientki on this list has also created a rather different approach
and made it available, called GUI support:
http://mientki.ruhosting.nl/data_www/pylab_works/pw_gui_support.html

Java rules mainly due to NetBeans thats what i feel.

I don't know enough to have an opinion here, but I have a feeling
not everyone would agree with that statement.

Is Python code to c/c++ code a practical idea?

Well, there's Shed Skin (and others, I think):

I think Python people would argue that in most cases, why
bother? If you have speed-critical parts of your program, that
can be written (or translated to?) in C, but many times people
seem happy to code and run the apps in Python.

Che

An excellent option is wxFormBuilder with wxPython code generation!!

···

2009/9/11 Mike Driscoll mike@pythonlibrary.org

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:02 PM, nipun batra nipunreddevil@gmail.com wrote:

But Wing IDE is not free,so that kills the whole purpose.Though it is very professional.So we have 3 choices:
1.Boa
2.wxGlade
3.wxForm


Saludos / Best regards

Mario Lacunza
Software Architect - Webmaster

Website: http://www.lacunza.biz

Email: mlacunza [AT] gmail [DOT] com
Lima - Peru

Actually, there is a free version.

···

On Sep 10, 10:02 pm, nipun batra <nipunredde...@gmail.com> wrote:

But Wing IDE is not free,so that kills the whole purpose.Though it is very
professional.So we have 3 choices:
1.Boa
2.wxGlade
3.wxForm

> 3.Demos are really good,but if they could be uploaded on website separately
> explaining more about each with screenshots,people especially newbies will
> like wxPython even more

Online demos? A real *demo*, meaning you could interact with the controls,
would be a lot of work--it would really be a translation of wxpython into
javascript, thereby making a web-based way to do wxPython. That would
be great, and maybe could be done using pyjamas or something, but I would
think it would be a major thing to pull off (though certainly welcome). ...

If only someone were willing to tackle the work, IronPython _will_ run
on a web browser via Silverlight. No javascript is needed. The
difficult part of that conversion would be to translate all of the C++
code in the interface into C# code. The easy part (which needs to be
done anyway to get ready for Python 3.0) would be to tighten up the
string vs unicode vs byte data. Actually, breaking down the demo into
small parts would be a good start for the effort of supporting the
other versions of Python.

···

--
Vernon Cole

C M wrote:

Online demos? A real *demo*, meaning you could interact with the controls,
would be a lot of work--it would really be a translation of wxpython into
javascript, thereby making a web-based way to do wxPython. That would
be great, and maybe could be done using pyjamas or something, but I would
think it would be a major thing to pull off (though certainly welcome).

I agree with both parts of the last sentence. I've written several wxPython apps, and am now up to my elbows in a web app using ExtJS for the browser side. What follows is essentially a bit of fantasizing on my part about how something roughly like ExtJs could become the "native widgets" wrapped by wxWidgets/wxPython. If the subject interests you, follow along, otherwise skip it.

I'll focus on ExtJs because that's the broswer-side application framework I'm familiar with. The normal interaction between an ExtJs app and the "back end" (database, middle tier, filesystem, or whatever) is via Ajax requests; in effect, the framework code usually maintains control of the user interface, even though asynchronously.

So, let's imagine that ExtJs components mapped cleanly to wx widgets. We could define a set of Ajax requests corresponding to the ExtJs component APIs, and on the server side, map these to the wx widgets. This mapping would be done by a framework or library, which could be embedded in a web server (or an application that, under the covers, includes a server that handles the needed HTTP/Ajax requests.

Don't take the last paragraph too seriously -- it's a gross oversimplification of what would really have to be done, and it's full of holes. I'm sort of using ExtJs here as an "existence proof".
If someone were to undertake this, they'd probably create a JS infrastructure that implements something closer to the wx API, with the intent that an application developer would write little, if any JS.

Maybe the best way to think of this is by analogy to the X Window system, where the application communicates with its GUI via a remote protocol, and the GUI lives in an X window server. In this case, the "window server" would the browser, and the communication protocol would be wx-specific, but based on XHR.

Someone undertaking this would likely run into issues that would be hard to resolve cleanly, arising from the serious differences between an application running in an OS, interacting with the user via the OS-supplied GUI, and an application interacting via a browser over HTTP.

It might be necessary to give up on the "platform independent" goal -- wx application developers would have to deal with this "target platform" differently. Perhaps its real utility would lie in the ability for an experienced wx app developer to use most of what he already knows in writing his first web app, and in easing the task of migrating a wx-based desktop app to a web environment.

For what it may be worth,

···

--
Don Dwiggins
Advanced Publishing Technology

I definitely do not know Ajax and such to fully understand this, and
I am highly likely to utter something nonsensical here, but let me
jump in anyway...

Maybe I can comment on the last point. I'm not sure why this
"platform" would require dealing with it differently, provided the
mapping from wxPython widgets to the wxPython-in-a-browser
widgets was good enough. E.g., with a wxComboBox, one
should be able to write a regular comboBox in wxPython and
the new approach would know how to draw the comboBox in the
browser, and do the animation of the dropdown, and such.
It seems like what could be good would be a way to "translate"
or compile wxPython code to something like Javascript.
That's why I mentioned Pyjamas, because it is a Python-to-
Javascript compiler, and has its own widget set and AJAX
framework. I could imagine a wxPython-API-to-Pyjamas-widgets
approach, too, such that maybe one could write a regular
wxPython app for the desktop and there could be some way
to automatically allow that to run and create a GUI on a browser,
with the calls to the server being intelligently routed by Pyjamas.
I haven't even tried to use Pyjamas, though, so what I am
spouting here may be totally off base.

Che

···

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Don Dwiggins <ddwiggins@advpubtech.com> wrote:

C M wrote:

Online demos? A real *demo*, meaning you could interact with the controls,
would be a lot of work--it would really be a translation of wxpython into
javascript, thereby making a web-based way to do wxPython. That would
be great, and maybe could be done using pyjamas or something, but I would
think it would be a major thing to pull off (though certainly welcome).

I agree with both parts of the last sentence. I've written several
wxPython apps, and am now up to my elbows in a web app using ExtJS for
the browser side. What follows is essentially a bit of fantasizing on
my part about how something roughly like ExtJs could become the "native
widgets" wrapped by wxWidgets/wxPython. If the subject interests you,
follow along, otherwise skip it.

I'll focus on ExtJs because that's the broswer-side application
framework I'm familiar with. The normal interaction between an ExtJs app
and the "back end" (database, middle tier, filesystem, or whatever) is
via Ajax requests; in effect, the framework code usually maintains
control of the user interface, even though asynchronously.

So, let's imagine that ExtJs components mapped cleanly to wx widgets.
We could define a set of Ajax requests corresponding to the ExtJs
component APIs, and on the server side, map these to the wx widgets.
This mapping would be done by a framework or library, which could be
embedded in a web server (or an application that, under the covers,
includes a server that handles the needed HTTP/Ajax requests.

Don't take the last paragraph too seriously -- it's a gross
oversimplification of what would really have to be done, and it's full
of holes. I'm sort of using ExtJs here as an "existence proof".
If someone were to undertake this, they'd probably create a JS
infrastructure that implements something closer to the wx API, with the
intent that an application developer would write little, if any JS.

Maybe the best way to think of this is by analogy to the X Window
system, where the application communicates with its GUI via a remote
protocol, and the GUI lives in an X window server. In this case, the
"window server" would the browser, and the communication protocol would
be wx-specific, but based on XHR.

Someone undertaking this would likely run into issues that would be hard
to resolve cleanly, arising from the serious differences between an
application running in an OS, interacting with the user via the
OS-supplied GUI, and an application interacting via a browser over HTTP.

It might be necessary to give up on the "platform independent" goal --
wx application developers would have to deal with this "target platform"
differently. Perhaps its real utility would lie in the ability for an
experienced wx app developer to use most of what he already knows in
writing his first web app, and in easing the task of migrating a
wx-based desktop app to a web environment.