From: Steve C. <ste...@ya...> - 2005-10-09 01:42:03
|
On Tue, 2005-10-04 at 09:00 -0500, John Hunter wrote: > If I'm not mistaken, the complexity of the core matplotlib build has > not changed in quite a while -- basically we've required zlib, png, > freetype and C++ since 0.5. Yes, some backends require additional > complexity (eg GTKAgg, the new WXAgg blit functionality) but you can > simply turn these options off in setup.py if you don't need them; in > the next few weeks I'm going to try and replace _gtkagg with pure > python using python buffers. All of the changes to support blitting, > widgets and so on have either been pure python or changes to existing > extension code (eg _backend_agg.cpp and _gtkagg.cpp). Also, the size > of the widgets module, which seems to bother you, is miniscule > > > wc lib/matplotlib/widgets.py > 985 3004 32510 lib/matplotlib/widgets.py Once you have a GUI independent renderer and widget like backend_bases.RendererBase and FigureCanvasBase then you have the building blocks for writing a large GUI independent widget toolkit. But just because its possible does not mean you should do it. I can see that writing a small number of widgets is useful to mpl, but am concerned that it could easily snowball into a project that is not directly relevant to mpl. Abraham was suggesting that we provide a way to override these mpl widgets and use GTK widgets instead. I think that is unnecessary and undermines matplotlib's idea of using a GUI independent renderer and widget. Steve Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com |