Eric Laffoon
Date Time Functions Development
Apr 01 2008
Kommander Development
There's a sizable difference between approaching with a different mind set and recommending others not use it. If for instance you are an avid Python programmer and used to PyQt that is another matter, and hardly relevent to most users. It is the fact that you had your information incorrect and advised people not to use it that prompted the troll response. Sorry if inaccurate, but your post was not in the best form.

First of all you may be surprised to know that many KDE developers feel it is easier to just use C++ and don't see the logic in Kommander. So you're not alone, you're just not in the majority. The logic with Kommander is you draw your interface and then run your logic in widgets, which is an object oriented type of thinking.

Before answering your question I contend that with PyQt, KJSEmbed or any C++ bindings you have to know what is being done with the classes and architecture of Qt/KDE to effectively use the bindings. I've sat through numerous sessions of developers proudly extolling how accurately they follwed the KDE model. I haven't done much but look at some docs, so maybe you have contrary experience.

To access settings in Kommander with Python you have several ways. Up front though I do admit, it's not what I plan to have in KDE4 where it will be functionaly identical. First off Python has DCOP bindings. The initial parser in Kommander was little more than a DCOP interface. However it's rather limited, but useful if you don't need to do anything fancy, just practical. Using PyQt you can access the QObject. Don't ask me how Python does it, but I know it has many of the types of Qt whereas Kommander is simply text.

So in C++ it would be
const QObjectList * QObject::children () const
This returns a list of children. You should be able to use the interface to QObject, get that list and reference child("isChecked") for instance to see if a checkbox is checked.

The research I've done for this has been related to KDE4 where I understand from my friend Sebastian Sauer who wrote Kross that it is easy to expose virtually every property and slot of an object to any DBUS enabled language.

The paradox is I need people working with those languages to help insure the interface works well for them. The function browser makes coding easy if you just have a vague idea what the functions are, and my objective is to add support for other languages here.

Even in the worst case, if you find all the current methods too difficult, it's quite easy to create a plugin, which will put your functions in the function browser. So for instance even in the KDE3 version one could create a map of functions including the bindings and make native Python function calls for anything Kommander does, and anything C++ does that Kommander does not.

At a base level though, if you are more comfortable typing commands to draw a window than visually drawing it then you are both statistically unusual and not a good prospect for Kommander. Nothing wrong with that.

The point is that Kommander does have extensive docs now, does have an excellent text editor and can be accessed internally with DCOP enabled Python and PyQt. If you were to decide to try it and were interested in helping I'd be happy to work with you on one of our lists to help to make sure Kommander is more useful to more developers. I think your evaluation was out of date, but it's also true that some people have enough difference in their approach as not to be compatible. Kommander was initally modelled after a program called Kaptain, which at first I could not see any use for. It was a paradigm shift for me. If there is a way you and I can make the "big tent" fit what you do that would be great, and if not we both have something we like. ;-)
Feb 26 2008
Kommander Development
Nice troll. I hoped I'd never see the day... Let's inject some facts here.

1) It's Kommander, not Commander
2) With Python you have to learn a language whereas with Kommander you can point and click with a function browser... which is why there are so many Kommander scripts here that it has it's own content category.
3) With Py-Qt you are directly accessing the C++ class structure to do things and manually writing your windows scripting instead of drawing them visually and rendering them with a Qt library. I found it easier to learn C++ and use Designer without the extra layer of Python to learn.
4) The editor has had syntax highlighting for several years. The new release adds highlighting for the new parser. In fact it's been the Kate part for a few years so it has Python highlighting too.
5) The help file is included and it's 946 KB in my source directory. (That's larger than the entire initial release of Quanta Plus) However I can point you to numerous applications where people never wrote any code and had great success with Kommander. I also have a mailing list and answer every user question on it. It must be a lot easier to tell people not to use Kommander here than to ask me for help via email.

As to whether you should use Py-Qt or Kommander, why choose? Python can easily be used within Kommander using #!/usr/bin/python which means full access with DCOP bindings and the ability to use PyQt also, which can further extend Kommander by accessing Qt's QObject class. You know what that is right? It means anything you can do in C++... and you're not using Python to draw your window, but C++, though you didn't write it, you drew it. You can also use PHP, Ruby, Perl, Rexx or if you're truly insane, scheme, in Kommander, which you can't do with Py-Qt.

I'd like to think you don't mean to be some kind of a rude dumbass, but after staying up till 4 AM every night the last 6 weeks working on this and falling behind in my work you make a summary judgement without even reading the changelog, let alone downloading, then advise others to ignore my work? I think I'd rather buy Steve Ballmer lunch than take this from a member of the community, and I'd rather have my head shaved with a rusty knife than be in the same room with baldy. Your opinion seems rooted in fertilizer, not factual relevent and up to date observations. If there is anything people should be wary of it is taking counsel no more researched or thought out than yours.
Feb 25 2008
Kommander Development
Feb 25 2008
Kommander Database Plugin Development
Oct 04 2006
K3D Graphics
Mar 11 2006
ALSA MIDI Kommander Audio
Sep 24 2005
RedWolf WebDeveloper Studio Development
Aug 24 2005
RedWolf WebDeveloper Studio Development
Aug 23 2005
RedWolf WebDeveloper Studio Development
Aug 23 2005
Quanta Plus Development
Dec 10 2004
Set CD-ROM Speed Utilities
Nov 22 2004
Katiuska Video
Nov 15 2004
bush_ Wallpaper Other
I agree about freedom of speech. I fully support it. That doesn't mean that all exercises of that freedom are not asinine, idiotic and in poor taste.

KDE sites are not the place to discuss politics so I won't go into a diatribe on how terribly skewed I think this is. As an American though I can say that a majority of Americans who voted this month do not share this view. Perhaps a study of history might help to understand real practitioners of genocide and tyranny and not some trendy "me too" scapegoat.

The perfect world where nobody suffers consequences does not exist. We could easily extend the absurdities to Ben and Jerry's ice cream for those who die of obesity or the medical community for bungling and killing people. How about the pharmaceutical companies? Dead is dead, right? After all what do you care about why your loved ones are dead?

My mother died of a blood clot the day after visiting a doctor who knew she was at extremely high risk for several circumstances my research shows any idiot in first year med school should know. Yet she was not prescribed an anti-coagulant. Does this doctor stand for death? It would be easy to take it personally as I miss her every day but in fact my mother should have also known her risk factors and my being angry with her doctor serves no purpose... So I got over it.

People you love will die for stupid reasons. Everyone is loved by someone. Add up the number of people who died at the hands of leaders throughout history and Bush comes in very low. For the US for example more deaths happened because of decisions by FDR, Eisenhour, Truman, JFK, Johnson, Nixon and Bush Sr. Truman was the only world leader to ever use nuclear weapons. As horrible as that was historians estimate it saved millions of lives on both sides ending WWII. None of these American presidents have had people lined up, mass murdered and put in mass graves. Other leaders do not come off so well, like Joe Stalin who killed 30 million of his own people because he was paranoid. Too bad it's not as trendy to focus on genocidal maniacs as the popularly elected leader of the country that started a domino effect in self government. At least we can be grateful many despots and their regimes have been removed from power, in many cases by resolute American presidents, leaving less who truly stand for death.
Nov 15 2004
Java Swing KDE 2 Themes
Oct 17 2004