-
Testing Pygtk Installer For Mac
Test Data The wheels (*.whl) on the PyPI download page do not contain test data or example code. If you want to try the many demos that come in the Matplotlib source distribution, download the *.tar.gz file and look in the examples subdirectory.
GUI's etc: PyGtk on Windows '(.) So if someone develops mainly for X and just wants to make sure that it is not impossible to run on Windows, you can use PyGTK. (.)', July 2nd, 1999 pyGTK on Windows '(.) can i use pyGTK under Windows??? It's probably doable (.) but not worthy in my oppinion (.). A much better choice is wxPython (.)' '(.)even if it is made to work under windows, pygtk would not have a windows look and feel.
WxPython is probably your best bet (.)' pygtk vs. '(.) If you want cross-platform capabilities (.) then go wxWindows.' May 17 2002 7.
'(.) The pygtk (and gtk port in general) does not yet support threading on windows. (.) GTK 2.0 is supposed to fix it but support isn't available.yet. (.)' May 17 2002 PyGTK vs. '(.) wxPython would indeed be a better choice if your applications are only to run on a certain infamous legacy operating system from the Pacific Northwest.
The PyGTK is a better choice if you are writing for Linux and want your application to also be able to run on windows. (.)' Apr 25 11. '(.) I'm using wxPython because GTK for windows wasn't ready three years ago when I initially had to write my first Windows application. If I evaluated both of them again today, I might choose GTK, and I might not.' Apr 27 In the nearest future I will have to decide what to use: PyGTK or wxPython.
I like those both APIs. WxPython has more widgets, but PyGTK seems to be faster. I can use them both for free (it's very important). My only concern is that although I'm doing development on Linux, I'd like to make my application runnable on Windows as well (Py2Exe). I'd like to choose PyGTK (because of its rich documentation), but I'm not sure if PyGTK is stable on Windows.
For now I know that wxPython runs well on Windows. For now I haven't experienced any problems with wxPython on Linux (Slackware, Aurox /Polish RH-like distro/).
I used wxPython on Linux, but I stopped because of its poor documentation (mainly C docs, not Python docs). But recently I noticed this documentation got better (.much.
better!). How well does PyGTK run on Windows (98, 2K, XP)? How stable is it? Will I be able to make an executable (using Py2Exe) of an application that uses PyGTK? TPJ wrote: GUI's etc: PyGtk on Windows '(.) So if someone develops mainly for X and just wants to make sure that it is not impossible to run on Windows, you can use PyGTK.
Fedora Install Pygtk
(.)', July 2nd, 1999 pyGTK on Windows '(.) can i use pyGTK under Windows??? It's probably doable (.) but not worthy in my oppinion (.). A much better choice is wxPython (.)' '(.)even if it is made to work under windows, pygtk would not have a windows look and feel. WxPython is probably your best bet (.)' pygtk vs. '(.) If you want cross-platform capabilities (.) then go wxWindows.' May 17 2002 7. '(.) The pygtk (and gtk port in general) does not yet support threading on windows.
(.) GTK 2.0 is supposed to fix it but support isn't available.yet. (.)' May 17 2002 PyGTK vs. '(.) wxPython would indeed be a better choice if your applications are only to run on a certain infamous legacy operating system from the Pacific Northwest. The PyGTK is a better choice if you are writing for Linux and want your application to also be able to run on windows. (.)' Apr 25 11.
'(.) I'm using wxPython because GTK for windows wasn't ready three years ago when I initially had to write my first Windows application. If I evaluated both of them again today, I might choose GTK, and I might not.' Apr 27 In the nearest future I will have to decide what to use: PyGTK or wxPython. I like those both APIs. WxPython has more widgets, but PyGTK seems to be faster. I can use them both for free (it's very important). My only concern is that although I'm doing development on Linux, I'd like to make my application runnable on Windows as well (Py2Exe).
I'd like to choose PyGTK (because of its rich documentation), but I'm not sure if PyGTK is stable on Windows. For now I know that wxPython runs well on Windows. For now I haven't experienced any problems with wxPython on Linux (Slackware, Aurox /Polish RH-like distro/).
I used wxPython on Linux, but I stopped because of its poor documentation (mainly C docs, not Python docs). But recently I noticed this documentation got better (.much.
better!). How well does PyGTK run on Windows (98, 2K, XP)? How stable is it? Will I be able to make an executable (using Py2Exe) of an application that uses PyGTK? I use wxPython through Wax - Wax makes it nice and easy. Note that wxPython doesn't have a completely native look and feel on Windoze, but it's pretty good.
I've never programmed with pygtk -.but. I did play with Gajim (?) a Jabber client written with pygtk. The look and feel isn't native eaither - but it's very classy. It made me want to learn GTK! I'll probably stick with Wax though.
Gajim ahs a version bundled with py2exe - which definitley works. The only slight downer is that the user has to install the GTK+ runtime. (The wealth of chociues makes this.slightly. confusing for the complete noob). Best Regards, Fuzzy. On 2005-07-22, TPJ wrote: 7. '(.) The pygtk (and gtk port in general) does not yet support threading on windows.
(.) GTK 2.0 is supposed to fix it but support isn't available.yet. (.)' May 17 2002 Pretty sure this hasn't been the case for a long time. The current stable version of gtk is 2.6.
Sure if PyGTK is stable on Windows. For now I know that wxPython runs well on Windows. I've used pygtk with success on windows. I suggest installing the gladewin package and pygtk, then perhaps hacking some of the demos in the pygtk distro. One advocacy point: There are complete reference docs, an extensive tutorial, and a constantly evolving FAQ for pygtk.
One point against: requires X11 on a Mac; definitely not native there, though that's where I do a lot of my pygtk development. I be able to make an executable (using Py2Exe) of an application that uses PyGTK? TPJ napisa³(a): In the nearest future I will have to decide what to use: PyGTK or wxPython. I like those both APIs. WxPython has more widgets, but PyGTK seems to be faster. I can use them both for free (it's very important).
My only concern is that although I'm doing development on Linux, I'd like to make my application runnable on Windows as well (Py2Exe). I'd like to choose PyGTK (because of its rich documentation), but I'm not sure if PyGTK is stable on Windows.
For now I know that wxPython runs well on Windows. For now I haven't experienced any problems with wxPython on Linux (Slackware, Aurox /Polish RH-like distro/). I used wxPython on Linux, but I stopped because of its poor documentation (mainly C docs, not Python docs).
But recently I noticed this documentation got better (.much. better!). How well does PyGTK run on Windows (98, 2K, XP)? How stable is it? Will I be able to make an executable (using Py2Exe) of an application that uses PyGTK? PyGTK runs reasonably well on Win32, although not as good as wx.
On linux situation is reversed - wx runs acceptably well, in contrast to PyGTK which works like a charm. PyQt works equally well on both systems. Jarek Zgoda. Kevin jackson on twitter: qnap nas openvpn tunnelblick.
How well does PyGTK run on Windows (98, 2K, XP)? How stable is it? Will I be able to make an executable (using Py2Exe) of an application that uses PyGTK? I do like PyGTK on Windows.
It works without problems. You can find a ready to use py2exe script on. You could also bundle the runtime DLLs with your py2exe'd application, but I have never done this. You could try doing this like described here: (use the setup.py script from the wiki and start at (2) in the mail). Greets, Marek PS: Yes, I admit it is harder than py2exe + wxPython but I still like PyGTK. I've used pygtk with success on windows.
(.) will I be able to make an executable (using Py2Exe) of an application that uses PyGTK? So PyGTK is now my favourite. Better documentation, runs on Linux and Windows, the possibility to make an executable program with Py2Exe. It's enough for me. One point against: requires X11 on a Mac; definitely not native there, though that's where I do a lot of my pygtk development. I suppose that 95% of my application's users will work on Win.
The rest will work on.nix. So my primary concern is PC world. AFAIK PyGTK doesn't look native on Win as well, but I don't care. Am Sun, 24 Jul 2005 19:47:30 +0200 schrieb Torsten Bronger: Is PyGTK more Pythonic by the way? I had a look at wxPython yesterday and didn't like that it has been brought into the Python world nearly unchanged. You can see its non-Python origin clearly. How does PyGTK feel in this respect?
I'd say, PyGTK is still quite like GTK in C. There are some nice features like iterators in treeviews but some things are IMHO unneccesary difficult and much more elegant in wx. I have started GUIs in Python with wx, but after a short time I was annoyed how many things were buggy.
I don't know why, but I fell from one bug to the other while programming one application. Then, I tried GTK on Windows, because I know GTK+ 2 a bit liked it. First I was very impressed, the documentation (Tutorial + Reference + FAQ) was after wxPy 2.4.x very impressive and things which were difficult in wxPy were easy in PyGTK. But after some time I realized some other things were complicated in PyGTK. You see, there is no non-plus-ultra GUI library and my best advice is to test it yourself to see which one fits your needs best. I hope a Qt4 compatible PyQt will be released soon, I'm curious about the new Qt4, which is free for GPL-only software on Windows. Greets, Marek.
On 7/24/05, Torsten Bronger wrote: Is PyGTK more Pythonic by the way? I had a look at wxPython yesterday and didn't like that it has been brought into the Python world nearly unchanged. You can see its non-Python origin clearly.
How does PyGTK feel in this respect? There are several projects that have as their goal to wrap wxPython and make it more Pythonic. IMO, the best choice now is Dabo, which is being actively developed and improved.
There is also Wax, which I got interested a while ago, but it seems to be the work of a single author who only works on it when he has a personal need. I've been doing some development work in Dabo, even though I don't currently need their database integration. The UI layer is very Pythonic, and I much prefer writing code in Dabo than plain wxPython. I've had miserable experiences trying to use WxPython or GTK under both RH9 and Fedora Core 3. There is some version skew between the installed versions of GTK and the WxWidgets on the distro site. I made some progress by installing an old version of GTK but there was still some problem. I decided it wasn't worth the hassle.
Unless there's some serious importance to making your gui very slick, I think the only Python gui toolkit worth considering is Tkinter. It has drawbacks but it's the one that seems to work the most consistently with the least hassle. Torsten Bronger wrote: Marek Kubica writes: I have started GUIs in Python with wx, but after a short time I was annoyed how many things were buggy. I don't know why, but I fell from one bug to the other while programming one application.
I'm very suprised. WxPython is still that buggy? One can go many months, or years, without encountering a bug in a wxPython program which is not actually a bug in one's own code.
Use of 'unstable' (i.e. New and/or rapidly changing) parts of the framework are a different story. As with most Open Source projects, such code is in flux and one uses it at one's own risk (reporting, I hope, bugs that are encountered so that they can be fixed). On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:16:01 +0200 Torsten Bronger wrote: I'm very suprised. WxPython is still that buggy? I read reports from 2000 about such observations, but they tried wxPython in a non-standard way, and the project has had 5 years to become more stable after all. Well, I don't know version 2.6.x but I had some trouble with 2.4.
I was trying to mass-hide buttons, which was possible with.detach or.hide (or was it.show(False)?). This was explained in the documentation, but in the release I had, was a bug somewhere and the widgets had no.detach function. Robin Dunn said it will be fixed in the next release. But that release came months later.
But I know that the release cycles had got a lot faster in the meantime. Besides, wxPython prepares for being included into the standard distribution. To replace Tkinter? No problem with that:) Oh, I see, there seems to be a more pythonic wrapper for wx: wax. Greets, Marek. I haven't used PyGTK very much, so I can't comment on it. My last impression of GTK-on-Windows was that it wasn't very stable and didn't blend well with the Windows native look and feel, but that was a while ago and it has probably improved a great deal since then.
I use wxPython, doing my development on Linux while most of the users are on Windows. The documentation for wxPython is lame (as you pointed out, it requires a lot of translation from C), however the wxPython demo app is WONDERFUL. It has great usage examples for all of the widgets, along with source code. PyGTK has a similar demo app (which appears to be an exact Python port of gtk-demo). WxPython does seem to have a richer widget set. One of the annoyances with wxPython is that there are many lingering traces of C, for example the need to have ID numbers all over the place, and the ALLCAPSNAMESFORCONSTANTS. Version 2.5 introduced some good pythonic syntax improvements, so make sure you get a recent version, and also make sure that whatever code examples you're learning from use the new syntax for event binding, etc.
I have encountered some problems with PyGTK only when I was trying to install a PyGTK version that was different from the installed GTK+ version. When those both versions were the same, I had no problems at all. (Another problem with PyGTK is that it's installation is somewhat more complicated that installation of wxPython, but I wrote a script that can download and install PyGTK.
The user have to tell where all this stuff should be installed to and the script just does the rest.) Tkinter is out of question. It looks ugly.
I'd like to write a program that would look nice.
Part of preparing most websites and web apps for shipment is testing across devices. Several popular web-based browser testing services make it possible to test iOS's Mobile Safari, but the best of these tools require an additional fee, have limited free features, or restrict the number of users who can use an account at the same time. Apple makes iOS testing available for free to all macOS users, with their Simulator app. The app is hidden away and you need to go through some hoops to support older versions of iOS, but you don't need special technical know-how.
Here's how to get it up and running with just a few clicks (and some longish download waits). It works for watchOS and tvOS as well! Getting Ready First install, Apple's developer suit. Be prepared for a long download. Simulator is a standalone app but it's buried deep within the hidden contents of XCode, where you can't get at it, and where Spotlight doesn't see it. So make a symbolic link of it in the Applications folder.
Here's how, in case you don't know:. Open Terminal (in the Applications folder) or your favorite terminal app. Copy and paste this line: ln -s /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Applications/Simulator.app /Applications If you're comfortable with that, hit Enter. Otherwise, skip down to the Addendum for an explanation. Open up your Applications folder. You should see Simulator!
And Spotlight should find it now too! (Note: Spotlight should find it. This stopped working for me the same day I updated from Xcode 9 to Xcode 10. Hopefully Apple fixes this.) Using Simulator Open Simulator (double click it from the Applications folder, or open it from Spotlight, or if you're psyched about flexing new-found command line powers run —type and follow with the Enter ⏎ key— the command open /Applications/Simulator.app). Look at that! An iOS device!
Now you can click on the Safari icon and start browsing! But read on to get the most out of Simulator Configuring Simulator With the devices you need all installed, let's get to know Simulator a little. We'll change the window size, add support for your computer keyboard, and add support for trackpad scrolling. Turn on the ability to type in Simulator with your keyboard By default, you have to use the on-screen keyboard to type in Simulator's iOS devices, just like you use the on-screen keyboard on a real iOS device. But you can turn on support for your physical keyboard: In Simulator's 'Hardware' menu, under 'Keyboard,' check 'Connect Hardware Keyboard.' Share the clipboard across macOS and your Simulator devices By default, the standard command v keyboard shortcut will not work to paste to Simulator from any other app. To turn on the shared clipboard (known in Apple devices as the pasteboard), select 'Automatically Sync Pasteboard' from the 'Edit' menu.
Note for users running older versions of Xcode: This worked differently prior to Simulator 10. You'll have to use shift command v to paste the macOS clipboard into the Simulator pasteboard, and then you can use command v to paste from the pasteboard. Switching Devices With Simulator you can test any Apple device. Select the device you want to use from the 'Device' submenu in the 'Hardware' menu. By default you'll have only the latest version of iOS, tvOS, and watchOS, but you can easily install 'runtimes' for older versions. Add support for older versions of iOS, tvOS, and watchOS To add support for other versions of iOS, tvOS, or watchOS, first select 'Manage Devices' from the the 'Hardwear' menu's 'Device' submenu.
(For iOS marketshare by version, refer to. Historically, the most recent and second most recent versions of iOS account for between 80–90% of iOS usage, with adoption of the most recent version taking several months to surpass the second most recent version.) That will open the Xcode app's 'Devices' window. Select the 'Simulators' tab. Then click the + in the bottom left corner. (Note that your window may look different — as of this writing, it has been redesigned in every recent version of XCode. In XCode 9 you'll have to select 'Add Device' from the +'s contextual menu). Under 'OS Version,' select 'Download more simulator runtimes.'
Another new window opens, Xcode's 'Components' preferences' list of simulators. Click the downward arrow button next to the OS you want to install support for.
When the download is complete, close the window. Back in the 'Create a new simulator' dialog:. Leave the 'Simulator Name' field blank. Select the device you want a simulator for.
And the OS version you just downloaded should be an option now! (Note that 'OS Version' is limited by 'Device Type,' so you must select the device type first.) Click 'Create,' and quit Xcode. Back in Simulator, the device you just added should show up in the 'Devices' list! There you have it! If you aren't familiar with the command line and want to understand what the symbolic link command was doing, continue down to the addendum. Otherwise, you're set up to test things on iOS without going through some extra service!
Limited-audience bonus 1: Turn on three-finger trackpad scrolling in Simulator By default, you can scroll in a Simulator device by clicking and dragging. With the hardware keyboard connected, you can also use the keyboard arrow keys. If you're used to using trackpad scrolling (e.g. Two-finger scrolling) in macOS, you may want to turn it on for Simulator too. While two-finger dragging isn't supported, three-finger dragging is. As of this writing, the experience really isn't good: there can be a initial delay, and then another delay before inertial scrolling kicks in.
Here's how to turn it on: From the System menu () open the 'System Preferences,' and from there, open the 'Accessibility' preferences. Under 'Mouse & Trackpad,' open the 'Trackpad Options' and turn on 'three finger drag.' Limited-audience Bonus 2: Opening multiple Simulator devices on older versions of Xcode Sometimes it's useful to have two devices up on the screen at the same time. Before, Xcode 8 (or was it 9?) Simulator could only run one device at a time. If you're on an older version of Simulator that doesn't support multiple devices, you can open two instances of the Simulator app with open -n: open -n /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Applications/Simulator.app open -n /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Applications/Simulator.app The second instance of the app opens with an error 'Unable to boot device in current state: booted.'
Testing Pygtk Installer For Mac Mac
That's saying 'the device you're asking to simulate is already being simulated,' which is true — by default it's trying to open the same device as it's running in the first instance of the app. Say OK, then go to the Hardware menu Device and choose a different device. (h/t for the technique) Addendum: what's that terminal command doing?? If you aren't familiar with the 'command line,' don't just run a command because someone on the internet says to.
I don't know if it's ever really happened (it probably has), but there are plenty of urban legends of command line novices getting tricked into doing serious damage to their computers. I've said that to make Simulator appear you run ln -s /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Applications/Simulator.app /Applications In a nutshell, the Simulator app is installed as part of Xcode, but it's hidden. So we create an alias (aka 'shortcut' to people who learned the term on Windows) to the hidden app, and put the alias in the Applications folder. Here's how it works: The 'command line' lets you run programs that don't have an interface — you tell the app what to do with text commands rather than by clicking on things. The first thing you write is the name of the command.
Here, we're running ln, a command that creates links, the technical name for aliases ( ln is short for 'link'). Next, write the command-specific options. Option are set with 'flags' prefixed with. Ln's -s flag turns on ln's 'symbolic link' option. There are important differences between symbolic links and plain old links, but in this context what matters is that apps cannot be aliased with a link; apps must be aliased with a symbolic link. The next thing ln needs to be told is the thing you want to create an alias to (the 'source file'). All files on your computer have an address, written in the form folder/subfolder/file where in a/b/c 'c' is inside 'b' which is inside 'a'.
This should look familiar from website URLs, and it's actually exactly the same: a website's URL reflects an actual folder structure on a computer somewhere. More or less That used to be a given; now it's only sometimes mostly true. In our case, Xcode is in the 'Applications' folder, and inside Xcode there's a Contents folder, and in that is a Developer folder, and in that is an Applications folder, and the Simulator app is in that. Next you specify the place ln should put that alias (the 'target directory'). It makes sense to put your alias to Simulator in the 'Applications' folder: add a space after the source file's path, and then write /Applications. (See that / in front of /Applications, in both the source file and the target directory? That's saying 'this is at the top level' - Xcode is a child of 'Applications' but 'Applications' is not the child of anything.
One last bit of vocab: 'Applications' is the parent of Xcode.) Okay, hit Enter!