steve at tightrope.demon.co.uk
Sat Aug 30 16:51:07 PDT 2003
0$269$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <slrnbkvm7b.oig.weingart at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030829184829.2fedd129.cpressey at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200308300659.h7U6xOM0059135 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3f50871c$0$269$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3f50ab95$0$269$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200308302143.h7ULhrtG065363 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <200308302143.h7ULhrtG065363 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Message-ID: <3f513875$0$268$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Trace: 1062287477 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 268 184.108.40.206
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.kernel:766
Matthew Dillon wrote:
> On the otherhand it is obvious to me that we want to make X available
> out of the box if we can, and X is pretty big too. I am not against the
> idea of including Python, but I wonder if something like TCL/TK would be
> a better solution for the type of GUI interface we will eventually want
> to have. I am *NO* expert on Python, perhaps someone can comment on the
> GUI aspects of Python verses TCL/TK ?
Python has bindings for most of the usual modern GUI libraries (QT, GTL,
wxWindows for example) including TK itself in the form of Tkinter also
GUI text libraries (Newt/Snack, Curses, Dialog).
I assume the installer wants to run under text, if the X setup failed,
as well as graphic mode.
Many would argue Python is a more expressive language than TCL and fully
object oriented with a particularly understandable syntax and shallow
learning curve for programmers.
On the downside a base /usr/local/python-2.3 is ~40Mb (about the same
size as Perl). That includes a rich library including XML processing.
More information about the Kernel