What Gui Builder?

wxPython Users
1

Hello,

I'd like to know, who and why use a gui builder and their experiences.

I personally haven't used them until now.

My thoughts:
1) For one side, I don't know, how they get along with existing code.
2) On the other side, is it really time saving to use them?
3) And I think, they disturb the code.
4) Changing a button name isn't so easy afterwards (with all references
in the code)

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.
wxGlade also (although it seems to be nice). Cornice is also built with
wxGlade.
Boa produces no extra file for controls.
(What I don't like is the incoherent appearance of the application).
There are 3 fields in the taskbar and this splittering is annoying and
confusing.
On the other side, Boa is surely an terrific application, with all the
features, debugger, plugins, ...

I like to edit with DrPython, but creating dialogs etc. in an editor is
a little long winded :wink:
If someone can convince me to use a GUI Builder ... :wink:

Thank you!

···

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

2

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.
wxGlade also (although it seems to be nice).

wxGlade *is* nice, and while it does produce XML files, it does produce plain
Python files too (as option) - and beautifully crafted ones for that matter.

If someone can convince me to use a GUI Builder ... :wink:

Why should anybody need to convince you?

We use wxGlade because it allows non-programmers to participate in the design,
and end users can change a lot of the user interface appearance / aesthetics
without needing to be able to program too (I am considering shipping our end
product with a patched version of wxGlade that does not allow to rename, add
or delete widgets but I have no such patched version yet)

We never use wxGlade produced files directly, but inherit classes from the
generated ones - that way we never run the risk of overwriting wxGlade
generated files

Horst

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:02, Franz Steinhäusler wrote:

3

Hi Franz,

Franz Steinhäusler wrote:

Hello,

I'd like to know, who and why use a gui builder and their experiences.

I personally haven't used them until now.

I don't think I would have gotten as far as a hobby programmer without the use of an IDE, at the time about 3 years ago I nearly went with Corel Paradox, then I looked at VB and Delphi and reading a programming publication I read about Python and the rest is as one says history, as I came across wxPython and Boa.

My thoughts:
1) For one side, I don't know, how they get along with existing code.

With Boa one has to stay away from changing the code it generates, normally quit easy, if it gets in the way of what you want to do you can still use Boa by using custom_classes.

_custom_classes = {'wx.ComboBox': ['ComboBox'],}
In the above the "ComboBox" is my special version of the wx.ComboBox and when dropping a combobox in the Frame Designer (Boa's GUI designer) I can choose which one I want to use.

2) On the other side, is it really time saving to use them?

- I think so, but I think it very much depends on how one works. I am sure there are lots of people out there who are faster NOT using one.
- For me it helps being able to see how things will look while I create the GUI
- Boa's handling of sizers is not very intuitive and I understand that wxGlade and wxDesigner are much easier. I wanted an IDE and not just a GUI designer so I stayed with Boa and just get used to things (obviously complaining here and there to Riaan :wink: ).

3) And I think, they disturb the code.

Yes, your code is differently organized if you use one or if you don't. But that does not disturb me.

4) Changing a button name isn't so easy afterwards (with all references
in the code)

Isn't that problem the same with any approach? Create your controls with correct names is always the easiest :wink: , but then you can always change it and Boa will take care of all the generated stuff or at least most of it and then there is always find and replace.

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.
wxGlade also (although it seems to be nice). Cornice is also built with
wxGlade.

Haven't looked at it for some time, I preferred Boa because it was an IDE and NOT because it was a better GUI generator and for me that was at the time easier to learn (one tool instead of learning wxGlade for the GUI part and something else for the other editing work and something else to debug with.

Boa produces no extra file for controls.
(What I don't like is the incoherent appearance of the application).

Don't you have a similar problem with any generator (e.g. wxGlade) it/they need to generate the stuff in a way that they can also read it again. Therefore a certain organization of the code.

There are 3 fields in the taskbar and this splittering is annoying and
confusing.

Don't understand to what you refer to here.

On the other side, Boa is surely an terrific application, with all the
features, debugger, plugins, ...

Absolutely :wink:

I like to edit with DrPython, but creating dialogs etc. in an editor is
a little long winded :wink:

I'll have to have a look at it one of these days.

If someone can convince me to use a GUI Builder ... :wink:

I think that this is something you have to convince yourself by trying out a few and see if you can adapt your work style to the way the tool works (I know it would be nicer if the tool adapts to your work style).

Thank you!
--
Franz Steinhaeusler

See you
Werner

4

Hi,

I use wxDesigner for my product, not all widgets are covered but it is easy to
add them by hand.

Everything with wxDesigner is based on sizers which has the advantage to
insure a common look on various platforms/screen resolutions.

I like pythoncard but had the above problem some decided to change.

I tested wxGlade and liked it, yet too many crashes: I do not think it is
mature enough for production code.

Regards,

Philippe

···

*************************************
Philippe C. Martin
SnakeCard, LLC
www.snakecard.com
+1 405 694 8098
*************************************

On Friday 24 June 2005 09:02 am, Franz Steinh�usler wrote:

Hello,

I'd like to know, who and why use a gui builder and their experiences.

I personally haven't used them until now.

My thoughts:
1) For one side, I don't know, how they get along with existing code.
2) On the other side, is it really time saving to use them?
3) And I think, they disturb the code.
4) Changing a button name isn't so easy afterwards (with all references
in the code)

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.
wxGlade also (although it seems to be nice). Cornice is also built with
wxGlade.
Boa produces no extra file for controls.
(What I don't like is the incoherent appearance of the application).
There are 3 fields in the taskbar and this splittering is annoying and
confusing.
On the other side, Boa is surely an terrific application, with all the
features, debugger, plugins, ...

I like to edit with DrPython, but creating dialogs etc. in an editor is
a little long winded :wink:
If someone can convince me to use a GUI Builder ... :wink:

Thank you!
--
Franz Steinhaeusler

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wxPython-users-unsubscribe@lists.wxwidgets.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wxPython-users-help@lists.wxwidgets.org

--
*************************************
Philippe C. Martin
SnakeCard, LLC
www.snakecard.com
+1 405 694 8098
*************************************

5

Hi,

I'd like to know, who and why use a gui builder and their experiences.

I use wxGlade, I second Horst's advice as to its usefulness. The
forthcoming version 4.0 is very good.

My thoughts:
1) For one side, I don't know, how they get along with existing code.

Quite nice. wxGlade can generate a separate file/class for each dialog
or frame, you just have to instantiate that class and show the dialog.

2) On the other side, is it really time saving to use them?

Definitely yes. The wxPython API is bothersome, letting the GUI builder
do it all for you is wonderful (especially all the tedious sizer stuff).
It's also much easier to test cosmetic changes.

3) And I think, they disturb the code.

Why ?
When you add your own code in a wxGlade-generated class, wxGlade won't
overwrite it when you regenerate the files. It simply knows where it has
put its own eggs.

4) Changing a button name isn't so easy afterwards (with all references
in the code)

What "name" are you talking about ? With wxGlade, a button in a dialog
will be referenced by an attribute in the dialog class (e.g.
self.my_button). It's much frendlier than using wxWidgets'numerical IDs,
actually.

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.

XRC is not so useful, as I've discovered with xrced. Using wxGlade to
generate Python code proved much more pleasant and productive.

The best thing I can recommend is to design a sample dialog or frame
with wxGlade, and see what kind of code it produces.

Regards

Antoine.

6

Hi Franz,

Franz Steinhäusler wrote:

[...]

I like to edit with DrPython, but creating dialogs etc. in an editor is
a little long winded :wink:

I'll have to have a look at it one of these days.

Some days are sad, just plain sad.
I know I've been bitching about this before but still, I cannot help it :slight_smile: so... here I go again...
Why the heck are the python/wxpython editors/IDEs so bad? I've looked at almost all of them... and... was disappointed by all.
I even tried to build my own but lack of time/proper mood/etc. prevent me from going too far.
I'm still waiting for some kind soul to build it for me... :slight_smile:
Unfortunately until some discipline is imposed on the development of a IDE I cannot see too much hope...
What we need is some company with python/wxpython programmers on their payroll to take a stand and say "We will build it! The Right way"
What is this "Right Way" in my view:

- Users come first! this translates in a easy migration path to this Idea IDE... all IDEs/editors I've tried seam to have a different keyboard shortcuts set... without an easy way to change them all. Some have an easy way to declare keyboard shortcuts BUT setting keyboard shortcuts isn't something I love, something I look forward. Why don't IDE designers acknowledge this and provide help? For example I primarily use SciTE, why don't I have a "Load SciTE shortcuts" on the dialog? If I am to give a serious try to a new IDE it has to be able to help me bypass learning a new set of shortcuts.
- Users come first! this also means that users expect some aspects of their favorite editor/IDE to be available in this new IDE:
  - automatic/manual session saving (this is a must especially if the IDE is in development)
  - outline of the active file
  - project management
  - versioning support
  - debugging
  - and let's not forget support for sound programming practices like unittesting, logging, refactoring

- Developers should be able to contribute! This one is very hard to do on an amateur kind of development. Look at the source code of all IDE/Editors... how many can see insertion points? areas where they contribute? Unless you are the developer or if you got in early... there is little chance to be able to contribute! Of course if you like tinkering you might be able to chance some bits... but really contributing is very very hard. (maybe I'm too unexperienced/stupid/lazy but this is how I feel). Ok, what's the cure for this? Sound architecture! this is why I mentioned a company earlier, professional programmers have a better chance together when it comes to architecture. If a company starts to clone the concept or architecture of something solid like Eclipse... then... only then will I see the light from the end of this dark tunnel. I remember creating a plug-in for Eclipse to handle logging (I used log4j, I think, as inspiration) The development started more as a joke because I imagined it to be too difficult, then it turned in pure pleasure when I realised how fast was I going... it got functional in a few days of part time work. Why? well because of the way Eclipse is structured, you don't need to access its source code in order to contribute... all you have to do is declare what are you bringing in.
If someone wants to implement a good wxPython IDE it should start by first reading somenthing like this:
http://www.eclipse.org/articles/Article-Plug-in-architecture/plugin_architecture.html

most promising work I've seen so far comes from ActiveGrid... who knows... maybe, maybe... :slight_smile:

Peter.

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:12:04 +0300, Werner F. Bruhin <werner.bruhin@free.fr> wrote:

7

Some days are sad, just plain sad.
I know I've been bitching about this before but still, I cannot help it :slight_smile:
so... here I go again...
Why the heck are the python/wxpython editors/IDEs so bad? I've looked at
almost all of them... and... was disappointed by all.

For the record, I've settled on using Anjuta for editing Python code.
It does not have any advanced capabilities for Python (debugging, etc.),
but its syntax coloring is configurable and the keyboard shortcuts are
sane.
Also, it has a modular architecture AFAIK so someone *could* perhaps
implement those Python-specific nifties you are talking about...

Eclipse with the Python plugin seems very good (including e.g.
intelligent code completion), but as long as you can stand its strange
UI and poor responsiveness with Sun's Linux JVM. You might give it a
try.

this is why I
mentioned a company earlier, professional programmers have a better chance
together when it comes to architecture.

Sorry, but are we supposed to laugh when we read this sentence ? :slight_smile:

Regards

Antoine.

8

Why do you think they are so bad?
I am perfectly happy with Kate or pyalamode or SPE or KDevelop for editing.
I am quite happy and grateful for wxGlade - sure, it still has minor quirks
and a few missing featires but it is developing along nicely, and has an easy
to contribute plugin architecture

I don't share your pessimism.

Horst

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:58, Peter Damoc wrote:

Why the heck are the python/wxpython editors/IDEs so bad? I've looked at
almost all of them... and... was disappointed by all.

9

Some days are sad, just plain sad.
I know I've been bitching about this before but still, I cannot help it :slight_smile:
so... here I go again...
Why the heck are the python/wxpython editors/IDEs so bad? I've looked at
almost all of them... and... was disappointed by all.

For the record, I've settled on using Anjuta for editing Python code.
It does not have any advanced capabilities for Python (debugging, etc.),
but its syntax coloring is configurable and the keyboard shortcuts are
sane.
Also, it has a modular architecture AFAIK so someone *could* perhaps
implement those Python-specific nifties you are talking about...

the problem is more complex, Anjuta is not cross-platform AFAIK and since we are on wxpython list... :slight_smile: I guess a lot of people here would prefer an IDE written using wxPython. :slight_smile:

Eclipse with the Python plugin seems very good (including e.g.
intelligent code completion), but as long as you can stand its strange
UI and poor responsiveness with Sun's Linux JVM. You might give it a
try.

:slight_smile: I did :wink:

this is why I
mentioned a company earlier, professional programmers have a better chance
together when it comes to architecture.

Sorry, but are we supposed to laugh when we read this sentence ? :slight_smile:

well, I'll leave it up to you... :slight_smile: I've worked in an environment where good practices were considered a waste of time... I know why you might feel like laughing, however, a smart company that for example does eXremeProgramming, has a better chance of creating something solid than let's say... a lazy self taught programmer suffering from ADD and working fueled only by enthusiasm.

Regards

Antoine.

Peter.

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:08:50 +0300, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:

10

Why the heck are the python/wxpython editors/IDEs so bad? I've looked at
almost all of them... and... was disappointed by all.

Why do you think they are so bad?

Because they are less than what they could be.
Also my perception is severely altered by my dreamer nature. I've seen so many talented people scratching itches, reinventing the wheel, and finally producing something that altho has value and is used by many it is less than what could it be and most of the time it remains less than what it could be.
Now for a sample of the dreamming (I've said it before but... again I cannot help it):
What if the lead programmers of the major wxpython driven IDEs/Editors got together on a mailing list + IRC channel and tried to push towards the same direction? What if they decide to implement an editor widget that could be used by all this IDEs and use addapters to bind that editor to their code. That widget could be pushed into the wxPython distribution. More than this they could talk about implementing a better IDE, they could share insights on the problem they've faced over the years coding their IDEs.

I am perfectly happy with Kate or pyalamode or SPE or KDevelop for editing.
I am quite happy and grateful for wxGlade - sure, it still has minor quirks
and a few missing featires but it is developing along nicely, and has an easy
to contribute plugin architecture

I don't share your pessimism.

:slight_smile: you don't have to :slight_smile:
there are a lot of people coding happily in vim or emacs, probably thinking " if this guy would have spent the time coding instead of bitching about editors... he could have probably implemented that useless IDE by now"

Horst

Peter.

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:18:35 +0300, Horst Herb <subscriptions@gnumed.net> wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:58, Peter Damoc wrote:

11

Werner F. Bruhin wrote:

With Boa one has to stay away from changing the code it generates, normally quit easy, if it gets in the way of what you want to do you can still use Boa by using custom_classes.

This is critical, and while using custom classes is possible one way or another with most GUI builders, I thin GUI builders discourage them. I think it a good practice to use a lot of custom classes, and I don't see this done with GUI-builder generated code.

What I mean is that any tame a group of widgets works together, and particularly if there is the need for a more than one of these groups, a class should be created that groups them together into one class.

- I think so, but I think it very much depends on how one works. I am sure there are lots of people out there who are faster NOT using one.

I think I'm one of those. Part of the issue is whether you spend the time up front, or later. Building the first prototype is faster with a GUI building, but I think modifying it is easier with hand-built code. In the long run, I modify stuff a lot more than I start from scratch.

- For me it helps being able to see how things will look while I create the GUI

that is nice.

- Boa's handling of sizers is not very intuitive and I understand that wxGlade and wxDesigner are much easier.

Boa was originally designed not to use sizers, so I'm not surprised.

Check out DialogBlocks as well. It's pretty nice.

-Chris

···

--
Christopher Barker, Ph.D.
Oceanographer
                                         
NOAA/OR&R/HAZMAT (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

12

Chris Barker wrote:

Werner F. Bruhin wrote:

With Boa one has to stay away from changing the code it generates, normally quit easy, if it gets in the way of what you want to do you can still use Boa by using custom_classes.

This is critical, and while using custom classes is possible one way or another with most GUI builders, I thin GUI builders discourage them. I think it a good practice to use a lot of custom classes, and I don't see this done with GUI-builder generated code.

One more perspective:

I love wxGlade, and I started out using it to generate widgets
and dialogs for my app. Eventually I felt like it was
getting in the way (I'm more of a command-line person anyway),
but I still find it *extremely* useful if I'm having trouble
remembering all the sizer incantations for setting up a complex
interface -- I just mock it up in wxGlade and then copy
what wxGlade did in my own code, rather than using the
generated code directly. Works for me! :slight_smile:

Cheers,
Steve

13

Stephen Waterbury wrote:

I love wxGlade, and I started out using it to generate widgets
and dialogs for my app. Eventually I felt like it was
getting in the way (I'm more of a command-line person anyway),
but I still find it *extremely* useful if I'm having trouble
remembering all the sizer incantations for setting up a complex
interface -- I just mock it up in wxGlade and then copy
what wxGlade did in my own code, rather than using the
generated code directly. Works for me! :slight_smile:

So for me. Using SciTE as editor, I am only in need of a good debugger which can debug wxPyton programs.

Regards,

Murat Ozsoyler

14

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.
wxGlade also (although it seems to be nice).

wxGlade *is* nice, and while it does produce XML files, it does produce plain
Python files too (as option) - and beautifully crafted ones for that matter.

Hello Horst,

I tried again. Yes, it is nice indeed.

If someone can convince me to use a GUI Builder ... :wink:

Why should anybody need to convince you?

Why not? If I use it, I can contribute with bug resports, feature
requests, telling others from my experiences with it :wink:

We use wxGlade because it allows non-programmers to participate in the design,
and end users can change a lot of the user interface appearance / aesthetics
without needing to be able to program too (I am considering shipping our end
product with a patched version of wxGlade that does not allow to rename, add
or delete widgets but I have no such patched version yet)

Ah, really interesting approach and info.

We never use wxGlade produced files directly, but inherit classes from the
generated ones - that way we never run the risk of overwriting wxGlade
generated files

Horst

Thank you for your interesting info!

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 10:59:34 +0000, Horst Herb <subscriptions@gnumed.net> wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 09:02, Franz Steinhäusler wrote:

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

15

Hi Franz,

Franz Steinhäusler wrote:

Hello,

I'd like to know, who and why use a gui builder and their experiences.

I personally haven't used them until now.

I don't think I would have gotten as far as a hobby programmer without
the use of an IDE, at the time about 3 years ago I nearly went with
Corel Paradox, then I looked at VB and Delphi and reading a programming
publication I read about Python and the rest is as one says history, as
I came across wxPython and Boa.

Hello Werner,

My thoughts:
1) For one side, I don't know, how they get along with existing code.

With Boa one has to stay away from changing the code it generates,
normally quit easy, if it gets in the way of what you want to do you can
still use Boa by using custom_classes.

_custom_classes = {'wx.ComboBox': ['ComboBox'],}
In the above the "ComboBox" is my special version of the wx.ComboBox and
when dropping a combobox in the Frame Designer (Boa's GUI designer) I
can choose which one I want to use.

2) On the other side, is it really time saving to use them?

- I think so, but I think it very much depends on how one works. I am
sure there are lots of people out there who are faster NOT using one.
- For me it helps being able to see how things will look while I create
the GUI

ACK.

[snipped useful info]

There are 3 fields in the taskbar and this splittering is annoying and
confusing.

Don't understand to what you refer to here.

On windows, you have three items in the taskbar, and if you click on one
of the (for example properties), only this window appear,
It would be much nicer to have only one entry in the taskbar, and this +
minimize/restore the whole application.

On the other side, Boa is surely an terrific application, with all the
features, debugger, plugins, ...

Absolutely :wink:

I like to edit with DrPython, but creating dialogs etc. in an editor is
a little long winded :wink:

I'll have to have a look at it one of these days.

Yes, I think, it is no waste of time :wink:

If someone can convince me to use a GUI Builder ... :wink:

I think that this is something you have to convince yourself by trying
out a few and see if you can adapt your work style to the way the tool
works (I know it would be nicer if the tool adapts to your work style).

thank you for your reply!

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:12:04 +0200, "Werner F. Bruhin" <werner.bruhin@free.fr> wrote:

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

16

Hi Franz,

Franz Steinhäusler wrote:

[...]

Hello Peter,

I like to edit with DrPython, but creating dialogs etc. in an editor is
a little long winded :wink:

I'll have to have a look at it one of these days.

Some days are sad, just plain sad.

??? :wink:

I know I've been bitching about this before but still, I cannot help it :slight_smile:
so... here I go again...
Why the heck are the python/wxpython editors/IDEs so bad? I've looked at
almost all of them... and... was disappointed by all.

Hard judge :wink:

I even tried to build my own but lack of time/proper mood/etc. prevent me
from going too far.
I'm still waiting for some kind soul to build it for me... :slight_smile:
Unfortunately until some discipline is imposed on the development of a IDE
I cannot see too much hope...
What we need is some company with python/wxpython programmers on their
payroll to take a stand and say "We will build it! The Right way"
What is this "Right Way" in my view:

Until here, I cannot share your opinion.

- Users come first! this translates in a easy migration path to this Idea
IDE... all IDEs/editors I've tried seam to have a different keyboard
shortcuts set... without an easy way to change them all. Some have an easy
way to declare keyboard shortcuts BUT setting keyboard shortcuts isn't
something I love, something I look forward. Why don't IDE designers
acknowledge this and provide help? For example I primarily use SciTE, why
don't I have a "Load SciTE shortcuts" on the dialog? If I am to give a
serious try to a new IDE it has to be able to help me bypass learning a
new set of shortcuts.

Setting of shortcuts isn't that time consuming and you normally don't
change it to often afterwards. Most times, you can save the preferences
file, which I favor instead of using the registry.

- Users come first! this also means that users expect some aspects of
their favorite editor/IDE to be available in this new IDE:
- automatic/manual session saving (this is a must especially if the IDE
is in development)

DrPython has a session plugin,

- outline of the active file

you mean code folding?
class browser?
both in DrPython and spe.

- project management

there was a discussion about in DrPy.

- versioning support

What do you mean exactly?

- debugging
- and let's not forget support for sound programming practices like
unittesting, logging, refactoring

Bycicle repair man?

I think, Boa comes next to your requests.

- Developers should be able to contribute! This one is very hard to do on
an amateur kind of development.

DrPy is open for developers and new ideas. Only the core part of the
program, Dan wants to organize that alone.

Look at the source code of all
IDE/Editors... how many can see insertion points? areas where they
contribute? Unless you are the developer or if you got in early... there
is little chance to be able to contribute! Of course if you like tinkering
you might be able to chance some bits... but really contributing is very
very hard. (maybe I'm too unexperienced/stupid/lazy but this is how I
feel). Ok, what's the cure for this? Sound architecture! this is why I
mentioned a company earlier, professional programmers have a better chance
together when it comes to architecture. If a company starts to clone the
concept or architecture of something solid like Eclipse... then... only
then will I see the light from the end of this dark tunnel. I remember
creating a plug-in for Eclipse to handle logging (I used log4j, I think,
as inspiration) The development started more as a joke because I imagined
it to be too difficult, then it turned in pure pleasure when I realised
how fast was I going... it got functional in a few days of part time work.
Why? well because of the way Eclipse is structured, you don't need to
access its source code in order to contribute... all you have to do is
declare what are you bringing in.
If someone wants to implement a good wxPython IDE it should start by first
reading somenthing like this:
Notes on the Eclipse Plug-in Architecture

most promising work I've seen so far comes from ActiveGrid... who knows...
maybe, maybe... :slight_smile:

Peter.

Thank you for your contribution.

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 17:58:09 +0300, "Peter Damoc" <pdamoc@gmx.net> wrote:

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:12:04 +0300, Werner F. Bruhin ><werner.bruhin@free.fr> wrote:

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

17

Yes, absolutly :slight_smile:

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:25:24 +0300, "Peter Damoc" <pdamoc@gmx.net> wrote:

...
I guess a lot of people here would prefer an
IDE written using wxPython. :slight_smile:

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

18

Hello Peter,

Ehm, what is wrong with the styled text control?

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:47:48 +0300, "Peter Damoc" <pdamoc@gmx.net> wrote:

What if the lead programmers of the major wxpython driven IDEs/Editors got
together on a mailing list + IRC channel and tried to push towards the
same direction? What if they decide to implement an editor widget that
could be used by all this IDEs and use addapters to bind that editor to
their code.

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

19

Hello Steve,

yes, this is a good idea.

I can imagine, creating a more complex dialog with more sizers,
this could be really helpful.

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:55:11 -0400, Stephen Waterbury <golux@comcast.net> wrote:

[...]
I love wxGlade, and I started out using it to generate widgets
and dialogs for my app. Eventually I felt like it was
getting in the way (I'm more of a command-line person anyway),
but I still find it *extremely* useful if I'm having trouble
remembering all the sizer incantations for setting up a complex
interface -- I just mock it up in wxGlade and then copy
what wxGlade did in my own code, rather than using the
generated code directly. Works for me! :slight_smile:

Cheers,
Steve

--
Franz Steinhaeusler

20

Hi,

I'd like to know, who and why use a gui builder and their experiences.

I use wxGlade, I second Horst's advice as to its usefulness. The
forthcoming version 4.0 is very good.

Hello Antoine,

I saw and like this new version.

My thoughts:
1) For one side, I don't know, how they get along with existing code.

Quite nice. wxGlade can generate a separate file/class for each dialog
or frame, you just have to instantiate that class and show the dialog.

2) On the other side, is it really time saving to use them?

Definitely yes. The wxPython API is bothersome, letting the GUI builder
do it all for you is wonderful (especially all the tedious sizer stuff).
It's also much easier to test cosmetic changes.

Yes, I agree for the sizer stuff.

3) And I think, they disturb the code.

Why ?
When you add your own code in a wxGlade-generated class, wxGlade won't
overwrite it when you regenerate the files. It simply knows where it has
put its own eggs.

4) Changing a button name isn't so easy afterwards (with all references
in the code)

What "name" are you talking about ?

The name of the variable for a button for example.

With wxGlade, a button in a dialog
will be referenced by an attribute in the dialog class (e.g.
self.my_button). It's much frendlier than using wxWidgets'numerical IDs,
actually.

For example XRC produces a XML file, if I'm informed right.

XRC is not so useful, as I've discovered with xrced. Using wxGlade to
generate Python code proved much more pleasant and productive.

The best thing I can recommend is to design a sample dialog or frame
with wxGlade, and see what kind of code it produces.

thank you, I will give wxGlade a try :wink:

···

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:24:25 +0200, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:

--
Franz Steinhaeusler