Re: Code reformater?
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 14:15:46 +1100, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Still, it is better not to lose the indentation in the first place. Thanks for the tips. But it does happen when copy/pasting code from either a web page or an e-mail that TABs are messed up, which is not a problem with other languages, but is a problem with Python. Too bad. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Code reformater?
Hello When I copy/paste Python code from the web, every so often, the TABs are wrong, which means that the code won't work and I have to manually reformat the code. Is there a code reformater that can parse the code to make it right? Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Good Looking UI for a stand alone application
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 08:15:18 -0600, Chris Mellon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's a few more caveats I haven't addressed, and there are places where wx isn't perfect. BTW, do you know of a good article/book on writing cross-platform GUI apps, with recommendations, pitfalls, etc. especially using wxWidgets? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Good Looking UI for a stand alone application
On 17 Dec 2006 21:20:14 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You could write it as a web app, with an executable which launches the server and points a browser at it. Right, I was thinking of this too, but since the OP was talking of a fat app... Python GUI work is a bit of a drag, really. One of the worst things about it, IMHO. But then, it was built for write text-based scripts. I assume someone could take it, and turn it into a GUI-based solution for Windows, but it's probably quite a lot of work, and maybe there just isn't anyone willing to pay for it. It'd be cool, though to be able to just send someone a 10KB GUI Python script and have it run in Windows natively :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Good Looking UI for a stand alone application
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 09:37:04 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Luc Heinrich) wrote: Crossplatform toolkits/frameworks suck. All of them. No exception. If you want your app to look *AND* feel great on all platform, abstract the core of your application and embed it in platform native GUI code. +1. Applications beyond very basic GUI's are better off rewriting the GUI for each application, while keeping the business logic separate. Even something as basic as QuickTime sucks on Windows. I'd be curious to see the source code to Skype: I just installed the Linux version, and it looks very nice. Maybe it was recompiled with Kylix. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Good Looking UI for a stand alone application
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 01:23:10 +0100, Christophe Cavalaria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They use QT. Back to read the first part of your post. It doesn't make much difference: - QT is big, so even small apps carry a lot of baggage - by not using the native widgets, you're dependent on that layer to keep up with changes in the look feel of the platform (eg. XP's widgets that look different from previous widgets). Bottom line: GUI apps are better off extracting the maximum amount of logic into OS-agnostic code, and then rewrite the GUI for each platform. Even better: Considering that Windows has a 95% market share, make doubly-sure that it makes financial sense to provide a cross-platform GUI application (the server can be written in text mode, and can then be available for multiple OS's with no major problem). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Mod_python vs. application server like CherryPy?
On 5 Dec 2006 17:05:06 -0800, fumanchu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a nutshell, mod_python gives you access from Python to the Apache API, whereas CherryPy and friends give you their own API. I didn't know Apache had an API of its own, or that it was even needed when writing a web application in Python. What does it provide in addition to Python/mod_python? CherryPy allows me to focus on the application layer and leave the server/deployment layer for another day. So you recommend using Apache as the front-end, and run an application server like CherryPy in the background? But IMO CherryPy has a cleaner API for process control (engines and servers), application composition (via the object tree and via WSGI), and plugins (like gzip, static content, and header management). Interesting. I'll see if I can find more information on writing an app with Python in pure CGI, in FastCGI, in mod_python, and as an application server with eg. CherryPy. Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Mod_python vs. application server like CherryPy?
On 6 Dec 2006 14:55:58 -0800, Graham Dumpleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although WSGI is an extreme case because of the level it pitches at, other systems such as CherryPy and Django aren't much different as they effectively duplicate a lot of stuff that could be achieved using more basic functionality of Apache as well. Mmm... So how can I use those goodies from Apache? Just through their configuration files, or do I have to somehow call them from Python? Is the fact that Python developers tend to ignore resources in Apach due to difficulties in making calls from Python, making the scripts unpythonic? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Mod_python vs. application server like CherryPy?
On 6 Dec 2006 16:32:14 -0800, Graham Dumpleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Getting perhaps back to the answer you were seeking right back at the start, that is if you are new to web application and development and Python, then you may well be better of just using a higher level framework as they will make it easier and isolate you from any pains in understanding Apache and how to use it properly. Thanks a lot for the feedback. It's beginning to make sense :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Mod_python vs. application server like CherryPy?
Hi I'm still a newbie when it comes to web applications, so would like some help in choosing a solution to write apps with Python: What's the difference between using running it through mod_python vs. building an application server using Python-based tools like CherryPy, Quixote, Draco, etc.? Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: fork and exit needed?
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 04:30:09 -0600, Nick Craig-Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure how you do open stdout to /dev/null in python though! I suspect something like this... import posix posix.close(1) posix.open(/dev/null, posix.O_WRONLY) Thanks everyone, but no go :-/ Neither the above nor sys.stdout = open(os.devnull, 'w') trigger the application. This is a script that is launched by the Asterisk open-source PBX server when a call comes in. Its goal is to broadcast some messages to a Windows caller ID application that is installed on all client hosts so that they know who's calling. Before I go ask in an Asterisk forum, is there some Python-related issue that experienced Python developers can spot in this rewrite of a Perl script that works? Here's the original Perl script: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+NetCID Here's my Python rewrite: http://codecomplete.free.fr/asterisk/python_cid.txt Yes, I changed the UDP port from 42685 to 42687 so that my development client host is the only one getting the broadcast :-) Thank you! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: fork and exit needed?
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:38:11 +0100, Vincent Delporte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here's my Python rewrite: http://codecomplete.free.fr/asterisk/python_cid.txt More information. Here's what Asterisk says when I call in: *CLI -- Executing LookupCIDName(SIP/fxo-0844e458, ) in new stack -- Changed Caller*ID name to Work -- Executing AGI(SIP/fxo-0844e458, ncid.python.agi|087077|Bureau Freebox) in new stack -- Launched AGI Script /var/lib/asterisk/agi-bin/ncid.python.agi Failed to execute '/var/lib/asterisk/agi-bin/ncid.python.agi': Exec format error -- AGI Script ncid.python.agi completed, returning 0 FWIW, I wrote the original in a Windows text editor, and copy-pasted the script in Asterisk by sshing into the server. CRLF vs. CR issue? Something else? Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: fork and exit needed?
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:48:53 +0100, Vincent Delporte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- Launched AGI Script /var/lib/asterisk/agi-bin/ncid.python.agi Failed to execute '/var/lib/asterisk/agi-bin/ncid.python.agi': Exec format error Stupid me :-/ Forgot the all-important #!/usr/bin/python Sorry for the disturbance.. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: fork and exit needed?
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:18:24 -0500, Mike C. Fletcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: which is how Linux knows what interpreter to use for the script. Thanks. That's what I found out after a bit more research. I didn't pay attention to this because it's not needed to run under Windows, and I was focusing on the fork() and stdout thing. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: fork and exit needed?
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:30:03 -0600, Nick Craig-Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: import os,sys,time print pre:, os.getpid() sys.stdout = open(os.devnull, 'w') print post:, os.getpid() time.sleep(60) (Granted, I'm on WinXP; I also suspect the original stdout is still open in the background, maybe dualled with stderr?) Yes that is the point - the original stdout is still open. I don't think this discussion is relevant to windows though - windows has its own way of making daemons. Thanks everyone. I'll see if the Python script runs OK in an Asterisk PBX on Linux. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
fork and exit needed?
Hi I'm a Python newbie, and would like to rewrite this Perl scrip to be run with the Asterisk PBX: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+NetCID Anyone knows if those lines are necessary, why, and what their alternative is in Python? --- open STDOUT, '/dev/null'; fork and exit; --- Thank you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Compiling wxPython app for Windows; Single EXE
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:46:11 -0500, Philippe Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes there is a way to make one .exe/.msi for everything ... but it does require purchasing a tool such as VC++. I have python + wxWindows + my stuff + many other libraries in one installer (takes 120 Megs (sigh)) I know. An empty frame with wxPython runs at ... 12MB :-/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Compiling wxPython app for Windows; Single EXE
On 14 Aug 2006 09:39:02 -0700, ajaksu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm using PyInstaller (http://pyinstaller.hpcf.upr.edu/) precisely to compile a wxPython-based program. So I'm curious about what makes py2exe the best tool..., because I'm about to miss that due to my ignorance. I didn't know about PyInstaller. I'll check it out. Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Compiling wxPython app for Windows; Single EXE
Hi I browsed the archives, but since some messages date back a bit, I wanted to make sure that - py2exe is still the best tool in town to compile Python scripts to run on a Windows host that doesn't have Python installed, including wxWidgets/wxPython - there's no way to build a single EXE, to make deployment easier (if multiple files, I need to build an installer with eg. NSIS or InnoSetup)? Thank you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Compiling wxPython app for Windows; Single EXE
On 13 Aug 2006 13:46:14 -0700, Tim N. van der Leeuw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a wxPython app, which I compile into one EXE file. Then there's just 1 support file needed: a MS DLL (which, once distributed, you will not need to update). OK. So you compile the Python app into an EXE using py2exe, and then use eg. 7Zip to combine all the files into a single EXE, that 1. uncompresses itself in the directory validated by the user 2. when done, runs the Python EXE? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Linux] What toolkit for a good grid/spreadsheet widget?
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 10:58:42 GMT, Dave Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But both pyqt and wxpython also offer that. Try running the demos for each. Thx everyone! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
[Linux] What toolkit for a good grid/spreadsheet widget?
Hello I'd like to use Python under Linux to write a business application, and I'll need a good grid/spreadsheet editable widget, maybe not on par with eg. ComponentOne's excellent VSFlexGrid (http://www.componentone.com/newimages/flexgrid_02_lg.gif), but somewhat professional-grade. Any recommendation? GTK doesn't seem to have one that is good enough (GTKSheet http://gtkextra.sourceforge.net/ looks like a basic table), so I was wondering about QT/PyQt and wxWidgets/wxPython. Any recommendation? Thank you VD. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Linux] What toolkit for a good grid/spreadsheet widget?
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 22:07:04 +0100, Phil Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PyQt4 has QTableWidget... Thx for the two pointers. Are those widgets more than just tables, ie. can I edit the contents, including displaying a combo box, can items be grouped or hierarchized, or are they just basic, read-only tables to display results? I need this kind of widget to build a 2+ column interface to let users type entries into the application as an alternative to MS Access-style complicated entry masks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Need a compelling argument to use Django instead of Rails
On 31 Jul 2006 07:05:27 -0700, Ben Sizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Typically you run PHP as a module in your webserver, so there should be no process startup overhead. mod_python provides the same sort of functionality for Python, but is not as popular or widely installed as the PHP Apache module. So, if mod_python provides the same functionality, it's not the main reason why Python developers use application servers while PHP users still program with page codes in /htdocs. Why do PHP users stick to that old way of things? Because they mostly use shared hosts, with no way to install their application server? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Need a compelling argument to use Django instead of Rails
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 04:07:12 GMT, Tim Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Exactly. The Python interpreter can take a significant fraction of a second to start. For the typical short web request, the overhead can add up. On the other hand, unless you're handling dozens of requests per minute, users are unlikely to notice. You can also keep session state in memory instead of spilling to disk, and you can keep database sessions open. Thanks for the explanations. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
War chest for writing web apps in Python?
Hello I'm thinking of using Python to build the prototype for a business web appplication. The development and test machine is XP, while ultimate deployment will be on a shared Unix web host. What would you recommend I get, besides the Python engine itself? Good IDE (Kodomo?) ? Some kind of GUI designer? Add-on's? Other tools? Thank you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: War chest for writing web apps in Python?
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:06:10 +0200, Vincent Delporte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) Thanks everyone for the input! For the IDE: Ideally, I'd like something modern that uses language wordlists (to show syntax, variables, etc. in different colors), a window that lists all the procedures so I can easily jump from on to the other, possibly an edit window that can fold code with the familiar + sign in the left side, etc. I'll check out WingIDE and Eric3. For the GUI builder: It's just that I'm used to Delphi, ie. drawing the interface with a mouse, but I guess the equivalent is just a WYSIWYG HTML editor like DreamWeaver etc. For the application engine: Indeed, I hesitate between CherryPy and Django, as I've read a lot of nice things about both. Hopefully, finding web hosters that support Python and those frameworks won't be an issue? Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Need a compelling argument to use Django instead of Rails
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 17:58:24 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben Sizer wrote: (snip) Pretty much every Python web offering revolves around you having your own server with the luxury of running your own long-running processes on it. BTW, what is the advantage of running a CherryPy/Django server instead of the regular way of code in pages? Improved performance because the Python interpreter is already up and running? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: War chest for writing web apps in Python?
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 17:31:47 -0400, Dan Sommers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You win that bet. (We actually tested on both platforms.) *Not* testing on the deployment platform is *definitely* asking for trouble. I did intend to validate it on the deployment platform. It's just that I prefer to work in Windows than Linux. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: War chest for writing web apps in Python?
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 17:33:00 GMT, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, syntax color coding, and block folding are supported by PythonWin (comes with the ActiveState Windows install) and SciTE. The structural browser isn't as easy... Thanks for the input. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
