Winpdb - A Platform Independent Python Debugger Proposal for a Python GUI Builder
Is there a good usable GUI builder for Python? I believe not. Is one needed at all? I believe so. If you think the same or want to know why I do, head on to the proposal document at: http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfvzvswt_13g7bn9fdg
Why use this as a way to force GNU/Linux onto people? wouldnt it make more sense to create such a tool for wxPython instead of GTK?
Doesn’t GTK work well on Windows?
Try using gimp or wing IDE or pidgin or … on windows. The performance lag is noticeable and they look crappy. I can always spot a gtk app on windows. On the wxWidget side I typically have to download the app’s source before I can tell if it’s Win32, MFC, or wxWidgets.
IMO wxGlade works just fine. There is a ~1 hour learning curve but once you figure it out the sizers it’s a lot nicer than trying to space things by hand. For new users it would be nice if wxGlade had a mode that would allow drag and drop placement of widgets and coding of events but I wouldn’t use it.
Now if someone would integrate your debugger and wxGlade into a easy to use IDE like Pyscripter…
I really don’t get it. How is it possible that people find glade and its derivatives remotely usable? Most comments on this site suggest that I start using one of these tools. Something is terribly wrong…
I mean, I am generally considered to be an intelligent user and in particular one who wears thick “software development glasses” and I still can’t figure out how to produce anything useful with these tools. Can you really expect a casual programmer to use it productively?
I can only assume you are 16 years old. Only 16 years old hackers can figure out complex cryptic systems in 1 hour.
I think this sounds like a really great project. I really love Python, but coming from Visual Studio I find the lack of a good and intuitive GUI builder to be a headache. I do use Glade from time to time, if I have to design something really intricate, but otherwise I end up doing my GUI programming by hand, as I can’t be bothered dealing with the extra layer of complexity Glade adds. Good luck with this, I’ll look forward to seeing the results.
Hello Nir,
newer glade doesn’t force you into table design anymore, and you may place controls freely on a fixed container (i consider this myself for a magic to pygtk translator).
besides, xml files can be loaded cross language and platform, and even stored in a real database for huge applications.
however glade dropped commitment to native language translation of generated code, it may be revived for, say, php.
gevergever may well build on these blocks to make a more intuitive gui: if you wish, directly build a field with a fixed container, and let a double click on a control point to a list of events, and editing the code after choosing an event.
use/revive python code generation, to avoid the xml handling.
good luck,
alex
I know that Glade has a fixed container (which is what Visual Studio does) but that in my view is not a good enough solution. I would like to see an intuitive non-fixed layout engine.
Also, in general my opinion is that Glade is completely unusable to casual programmers. Anyone who can not see this should not be designing user interfaces for general public use.
However, my views on this subject do not seem to resonate with other people. I am clue-less as to why but that is the fact.
yeah please!
the one thing that keeps python to be the number one choice in pro deploys is the fact that building and deploying a gui is a pain..
python says that it comes with batteries included, but tk is not enough power for me.
I agree fully with your proposal. The [[http://dabodev.org|dabo]] IDE already goes in a similar direction. Although using sizers/slots and the GUI designer saves the widgets/controls as XML, the GUI part of the IDE is quite complete and - thanks to the clear architecture of dabo - could be easily extended to fit your needs.
Having Visual Studio as the ‘guiding star’ this project will need a lot of manpower to be finished. So instead of starting a new thing, why not work all together on dabo?
I’ve used boa-constructor which works well and includes a debugger. It uses WX.
http://boa-constructor.sourceforge.net/
I totally can understand your intention and motivation.
The one thing I would change would be the gui tookit. I would use
wxpython instead of pygtk. but it is a matter of taste.
Best,
Marco
Hi nir,
What do you think about QtDesigner?
I recently tried development of a pyqt project and it is far easier to use than glade…
Good points:
You can connect base class defined signal to other object base class defined signal, with a comprehensive drag an drop.
And it fails on some points like you said:
- no possibility to define new signals without handcoding them.
- gazillons of options for each options (but still well displayed)
- still use hbox,vbox but it is more easily understandable than on glade.
(gui quite intuitive, but still can be improved on some points)
I’ve experienced it with non programmer people to do GUI and they could do gui 15 minutes after i explain them basis.
I think it could be a good basis for the tool you think about. Still it is done in qt…
Laurent