Oh, yeah. Not to mention: there is errata for the example.
I wonder: if the authors can't provide a simple, error free
introductory example, what chance to the rest of us have
of writing error free wxPython?
You will see that people like Robin Dunn are very very good, but you know no one is perfect and who knows who made the mistake in the book example
I'm also fed up with running wxPython programs that briefly
flash the window at me and quit with no error messages. Is there some way to run wxPython programs where the errors
in the code are identified?
I use Boa as an IDE, when I started programming with wxPython I liked having a screen designer, a debugger, a source editor and help search all in one.
For your particular problem it has some nice features.
- if you typed something incorrectly, i.e. a syntax error it will show that when you try to save your file, click on the entry and it jumps to the line where it found the problem (a little note often syntax error are probably a line or two earlier).
- when you run your application and it has throws an exception the exception information is written to the output file and you can double click on a line of the exception and it jumps into the source code.
Werner F. Bruhin <werner.bruhin <at> free.fr> writes:
You will see that people like Robin Dunn are very very good, but you
know no one is perfect and who knows who made the mistake in the book
example
Even if you put the errata aside, the author's don't explain the functions. And
why are they in a beginning example at all?
I use Boa as an IDE, when I started programming with wxPython I liked
having a screen designer, a debugger, a source editor and help search
all in one.
I looked around, but I don't think there is a mac version. Thanks for the
suggestion though.
Take it easy and have fun with wxPython
lol. At this point, I'd rather be doing C++ GUI programming with MFC.
...
I looked around, but I don't think there is a mac version. Thanks for the
suggestion though.
I don't know for sure but I think it runs on Mac. There is no specific Mac, nor Win nor Linux version. Download from CVS the latest and it should run.
Take it easy and have fun with wxPython
lol. At this point, I'd rather be doing C++ GUI programming with MFC.
I never did C++, but whenever I had to look at the C++ doc for wxWidgets (when the wxPython doc was not as far as it is now) it gave me lots of headache.
I never did C++, but whenever I had to look at the C++ doc for
wxWidgets (when the wxPython doc was not as far as it is now) it
gave me lots of headache.
Strange, for there are special wxPython remarks in it.
I never did C++, but whenever I had to look at the C++ doc for
wxWidgets (when the wxPython doc was not as far as it is now) it
gave me lots of headache.
Strange, for there are special wxPython remarks in it.
Sure there are! In most of the methods that behave differently there are notes at the bottom of the method for the different behavior for wxPython. However, I am not sure why you would think a lack of special wxPython remarks would make a headache strange. It certainly seems more probable then! Oh well...
I never did C++, but whenever I had to look at the C++ doc for
wxWidgets (when the wxPython doc was not as far as it is now) it
gave me lots of headache.
Strange, for there are special wxPython remarks in it.
Strange, for there are special wxPython remarks in it.
(instead of "for" I should've written "because")
Sure there are! In most of the methods that behave differently
there are notes at the bottom of the method for the different
behavior for wxPython.
I like it
(What I don't like is the fact that still, many classes in wxPython
docs just say "proxy of wxWidgets <thingy> class" and no
description. I find myself mostly using wxWidgets docs.)
However, I am not sure why you would think
a lack of special wxPython remarks would make a headache strange.
No, I meant that I think that it's strange he's getting headache
from it.
...
No, I meant that I think that it's strange he's getting headache
from it.
I should have said I don't like the C++ docs, as I did not really get a headache from looking at it (although I think it is an expression one can use, but then I often do misuse expressions or even invent them .
But I also think that we have gone OT for some time now.
Oh, yeah. Not to mention: there is errata for the example.
I wonder: if the authors can't provide a simple, error free
introductory example, what chance to the rest of us have
of writing error free wxPython?
You will see that people like Robin Dunn are very very good, but you know no one is perfect and who knows who made the mistake in the book example
We had a few cases of editors doing sweeping changes without understanding anything at all about the subject matter. For example, there was one case of all instances of "Python" being changed to "wxPython", or maybe it was the other way around... The index was made by an employee of the publisher and we were not given much of an opportunity to give feedback on it.
路路路
--
Robin Dunn
Software Craftsman http://wxPython.org Java give you jitters? Relax with wxPython!
(What I don't like is the fact that still, many classes in wxPython
docs just say "proxy of wxWidgets <thingy> class" and no
description. I find myself mostly using wxWidgets docs.)
I accept patches for docstring updates. I still need to finish the page with some comments about writing docstrings in the *.i files that are crunched by SWIG, but there are some other notes here:
If I had the time ... I still couldn't try your latest suggestions
on my project ...
I still need to finish the page with some comments about writing
docstrings in the *.i files that are crunched by SWIG, but there
are some other notes here:
If I had the time ... I still couldn't try your latest suggestions
on my project ...
I still need to finish the page with some comments about writing
docstrings in the *.i files that are crunched by SWIG, but there
are some other notes here:
