[GRASS-dev] Python GUI toolkits

[Michael Barton]

I just downloaded and installed wxPython, Activestate's Python for Mac,and
the wxPython sample/demo/docs package.

I ran the demo and it looks great. I think that people would be thrilled to
have this look for GRASS on a Mac.

The demo code *looks* very short and easy--but I don't know what is involved
to put it all together.

A very important aspect that I don't know is if creating GUI code on my Mac
in wxPython would run the same on Linux and Windows.

Also, how easy would it be to port a piece of pyGTK code to wxPython? I
realize that they are running different underlying platforms (though I
noticed that the wxPython docs say you need GTK for the Linux version). But
since they are both Python, doesn't that make the syntax somewhat similar???

Can anyone advise?

Michael
__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University

phone: 480-965-6213
fax: 480-965-7671
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton



> From: David Finlayson <david.p.finlayson at gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 21:36:04 -0700
> To: Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>
> Cc: Michael Barton <michael.barton at asu.edu>, GRASS developers list
> <grass-dev at grass.itc.it>
> Subject: Re: [GRASS-dev] Python GUI toolkits
> 
> In contrast to GTK, wxPython appears to be mature for all
> platforms---at least there are no major warnings on the download page
> (other than a note about Universal binaries)
> 
> The screenshots page shows examples from all of the major platforms:
> 
> http://www.wxpython.org/screenshots.php
> 
> I think that the demo that comes with wxPython would be an excellent
> test of the look and feel across platforms. Can someone try it out on
> OSX? I know that the demo program works well on Linux (Ubuntu/Gnome =
> GTK) and Windows. I haven't tried it on a QT system. It is impressive
> how little code is required to build the demo programs.
> 
> Personally, I like the idea that it will blend in with the rest of my
> desktop. I think you get all the integration for free. The toolkit
> abstracts out the differences between platforms. There would be no KDE
> vs Gnome choice that needs to be made since wxWidgets handles will
> work with QT or GTK depending on the installed packages.
> 
> I don't really know. I've only programmed toy applications with it.
> 
> On 6/7/06, Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Michael Barton wrote:
>> 
>>> Perhaps a more important question. The GTK apps I know of (GIMP for example)
>>> need x11 to run on my Mac. Can GTK apps run without x11? In Aqua on Macs? In
>>> (whatever it is) on Windows?
>> 
>> There is a native MacOSX port of GTK under development:
>> 
>>         http://developer.imendio.com/wiki/Gtk_Mac_OS_X
>> 
>> However, it doesn't appear to be as mature at the Windows port yet:
>> 
>>         http://developer.imendio.com/wiki/Gtk_Mac_OS_X/Things_to_do
>> 
>> Of the items on that list, most seem to be related to applications
>> which do their own low-level event handling and drawing, rather than
>> more typical UIs built from standard widgets. Some of them could be
>> relevant to the display canvas, though.
>> 
>> The most serious issues seem to be:
>> 
>>  Menus/pop up windows
>> 
>>     * These are currently buggy and need fixing. (medium)
>> 
>>  Miscellaneous
>> 
>>     * Currently GTK+ runs only on Tiger. This should perhaps be fixed.
>> (medium) #322372
>> 
>>     * Bugs, bugs, bugs :) Just pick one and fix it! :)
>> 
>> So far as Windows is concerned, I use GIMP, Pan and X-Chat on Windows
>> using the native GTK port. They have a few rough edges, but those are
>> all quite minor. The UI appearance is no less "native" than e.g.
>> Delphi applications.
>> 
>> Given the number of Windows users who seem willing to tolerate stuff
>> like WinAmp, I don't see any reason to worry about the differences
>> between GTK and the standard Windows/MFC controls.
>> 
>> Admittedly WinAmp-style UIs don't seem to have caught on for "serious"
>> applications, although I've seen plenty of "Easy Photo Album" programs
>> (usually bundled with scanners, digital cameras etc) which seem to go
>> out of their way to avoid looking like normal Windows applications
>> (e.g. most of the icons look like they belong on a toy aimed at the
>> pre-school age group).
>> 
>> --
>> Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> David Finlayson