.NET Framework ??

I am going to install it on the Mac which I am hoping to get out today and buy.

In 25 words or less, how do you do GUI design? Is it code driven, or graphical designer driven? Which is the best toolkit to use? Looking at python.org it lookes like i need to use some library, rolled into some design tool/ide + the python translator itself?

If there is one IDE that does the lot, I'd like to know about that.

BTW. Can be linux,OSX or Windows. I dont have Mac yet, but have the other 2.

That shouldn't hold you back, python works great on *all* MS platforms... and linux, and BSD, and solaris, and unix, and hpux, and OSX, and OS/2, and DOS, and QNX, and... I'm sure you get the point, right?

.NET, and C# can't quite make the same claim.

If you check out *any* modern unix like box, you will find lots of the system utilities for configuration, setting up accounts, email, etc are done in python. Those that aren't are probably in sh, perl, or C/C++.

And since python is free for any use, on any platform, trying it out doesn't need to wait for a Mac notebook. It'll run just fine on any old thing.

-Chuck

OBTW, "Python" is named for the comedy troop, Monty Python, not the snake. IIRC, its mascot is the foot crashing out of a cloud and stomping someone.

Maybe, but not its logo:

Although, the foot would be much cooler. :-)

Cheers! Rich

As usual, it depends. You can write scripts that invoke widgets, or you can use widgets as objects that call scripts.

Kdevelop. It comes with

Oops! 25 word limit reached! ;-D

Cheers! Rich

YuCK! I guess that is what happens when the original founder lets in the unwashed hoards. That logo is based around the snake reference. I read the forward to one of Rossum's books, and it told of the Monty Python linkage, and had the foot from the sky.

Sorry, should have said most work is .net

For the GUI "engine" use wxPython (wxWidgets+Python interface) -

.

For GUI design I prefer wxGlade - in spite of a bug:

- easily fixed manually (maybe fixed already?). wxGlade is at .

wxGlade generates the GUI code and then one has to hook in the application code manually (which is what I prefer to do anyway). The *excellent* part of wxGlade is that the GUI is saved as an XML-file so it is easy to tweak something with a search & replace in a text editor!

There is also

which is more "complete" because it can generate code too and organise code in projects e.t.c.. It's quite usable IMO ... but ... it *does* tends to crash occationally. Boa is probably the most all-in-one IDE there is. .

I am not aware of any commercial GUI tools - there is

for better code integration with windows applications.

Not really - Python code tends to be compact so there is probably not so much pressure for one.

Something based on Eclipse is probably the best bet:

.

I hate Eclipse myself - it reeks of the process-laden suckiness of Big Corporate Managed IT Systems!

I give up.

The majority of my Python work is targeted at MS platforms. Most of my PC level software is for internal use or specific customers (my work is mainly embedded programming), so it is quite specific. But I have a couple of programs that are for wider distribution, and I expect to have both Mac and Linux versions in the future - using cross-platform tools from the ground up means that change will be far smaller. Even for code that I know will never run on anything but Windows, I will normally write in Python (or sometimes Delphi, or even C, depending on the situation).

If you are writing code for a customer, and the customer chooses the development platform and languages, then you clearly have far less choice. And if they are paying for your time, then you have little incentive to choose a more efficient development platform. Even then, factors such as experience can weigh far more heavily than the benefits of a particular language - it does not help that Python code is typically a tenth of the size of equivalent Java code (according to a statistic I read somewhere) if you don't know what to write!

.NET is the stupidist crap MS has come up with. It clogs your system with unwanted files that cannot be moved. It compiles the application before running it. This increases the load time on first use. It has to do this again when you update the software, or any time it feels like it. The code is bloated and slow, and probably full of bugs. I don't need to waste my time finding out where they are.

Anyone who writes software in .NET is demonstrating their amateur status and corresponding incompetence. I don't need to waste my time with code written by amateurs, and .NET clearly shows who they are.

Whenever I'm looking for applications, I disregard any application written in .NET, and continue looking for code written by professionals.

One of the authors in the LTspice forum generated a MOSFET model program using .NET. He recently changed it to a stand-alone exe. This shows .NET is not needed, and how easy it is to get rid of it. Regards,

Mike Monett

Damn right.

--
   W  "Some people are alive only because it is illegal to kill them."
 . | ,. w ,      
  \\|/  \\|/              Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

now wait a second, you can make a net app look like xxxx.EXE on start up.. so, do you really know if it wasn't NET? And don't get me wrong, I write software my self, .NET is the biggest disappointment from MS I have ever seen. what a piece of crap. And I agree with you on the fact about wantabe programmers and those that really are. It's just a sorry way of saying "I'm not a VB programmer", you might as well be one, what's the difference. I haven't really check performance however, I would be willing to bet that VB is faster! at least it can compile to some what native code to some degree. I use C++ and Delphi mostly my self (Win32) on both.

--
"I\'m never wrong, once i thought i was, but was mistaken"
Real Programmers Do things like this.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5

Just say Nyet to NET.

-- Paul Hovnanian mailto: snipped-for-privacy@Hovnanian.com

------------------------------------------------------------------ Due to recent budget cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel has temporarily been turned off.

In fairness to the programmers, it's probably their managers telling them to use it.

--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
zero, and remove the last word.

I'm willing to bet you a dollar that -- at least if you're running Windows XP or Vista -- you're using plenty of .Net programs without even knowing it.

You can argue that the overhead of .Net -- and similar technologies such as Java or (to a much lesser extent) Python -- are not worth their (sometimes quite significant) overhead, but there are some objectives advantages to what .Net is attempting to do. Not that that implies Microsoft has necessarily done a particularly good job (I wouldn't really know, having only ever written "toy" programs in .Net), but hey -- at least they're trying to advance technology while they take over the universe! :-)

Note that producing a stand-alone .exe doesn't imply that .Net is gone -- it could have just been bundled up in the executable.

.Net certainly isn't "needed," but neither is Windows Vista or XP, or Microsoft Outlook or Word or any other program out there. How easy or hard it is to get rid of .Net is largely a function of the size, complexity, and scope of the program that's written -- "hello world" is trivially ported to any language/framework you want, after all.

----Joel

Try going away from microsoft and use some real software, written for purpose other than taking your money.

i

Then go argue with the people making comments about programmers and have your manager meet me in the alley.

--

Reply in group, but if emailing add another
zero, and remove the last word.

The "hooks" for .Net come in the form of COM "objects." Pretty much every major Windows application out there has a COM interface available (including many of the fancier schematic capture/PCB layout tools, and even high-end RF design packages such as Microwave Office). So there's really a philosophical difference in design there: Java tries to have a higher-level "base" API -- but you're left with a myriad of different protocols for interfacing to anything not included in that API --, whereas .Net tries to have a purposely lower-level API and Microsoft dictates than any extensions should come in the form of COM objects. :-) (This is perhaps the main reason Microsoft Office remains notably more powerful than OpenOffice, even though the VAST majority of MSO users will probably *never* use those features.)

I do agree that how well these design philosophies work is largely a significant function of program size and complexity, though.

The unfortunate answer to that is, "it meets some pointy-haired boss's checklist for acceptable software purchases." :-( I have a friend who's a programmer and he says they see this all the time -- they have a very nice software package (it's very much COM-enabled -- .Net apps can interface with it just as readily as Excel or Visual BASIC or Java can!) written in C++, and yet they'll see some company's checklist for software purchases that requires the software be written in some .Net language. Apparently PHBs attend some Microsoft .Net infomercial seminar and buy into the hype that anything written in .Net is good, anything else is junk... when in actuality, of course, there's plenty of junk to be found regradless of the language chosen.

Said friend refers to "dot net" as "dot crap." :-)

---Joel

Not come across the '.NET' rubbish until now. Bought a USB hard disc this afternoon. Had on it's CD a "One click backup!!" program.

240Mbytes of *.NET program crap later I find that this "program" can transfer no more than a whole single file at a time!. Hell I can do a whole directory via normal drag-n-drop. Deleted the whole mess. Yes. Rank amateurs all the way down the line.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com