Thanks, the reasons of the choice are clear. I obviously were not asking to switch to pyQT! I know it would a completely new work.<br>I was just considering how to take advantage from the fact that Python is common to Grass and QGis...
<br><br>Giovanni<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">2008/1/25, Martin Landa <<a href="mailto:landa.martin@gmail.com">landa.martin@gmail.com</a>>:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi,<br><br>2008/1/25, G. Allegri <<a href="mailto:giohappy@gmail.com">giohappy@gmail.com</a>>:<br>> I would have asked the same question as Luca. Wouldn't it be more profitable<br>> using QT, as it is already the way Python script are written in QGis? I know
<br><br>yes, that's true, it would be profitable at the end.<br><br>> the two projects are independent, but having a common GUI language could<br>> improve the development of scripts in both the environments and the
<br>> portability of them.<br>> My impression is that wxWindow is a bit easier to manage then QT, but since<br>> many of us write scripts for QGis too, it would be better to learn well one<br>> system (QT) then two (QT and wxWindow) :-)
<br><br>After discussion (one/two years ago) we found wxWidgets as the best<br>option for our needs. Since we have limited resources I don't see<br>switching from wxPython to something else as a realistic option.<br>Currenly wxPython GUI is under active development, the future shows...
<br><br>Regards, Martin<br><br>--<br>Martin Landa <<a href="mailto:landa.martin@gmail.com">landa.martin@gmail.com</a>> * <a href="http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa">http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa</a> *<br></blockquote>
</div><br>