On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 09:35:19 +0300, Attila Csipa <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday 09 June 2011 00:37:38 you wrote: >> implementation, ie. QML. What I certainly want is a public C++ API to the >> underlying code that QML sits on top of so that alternative declarative >> solutions can be implemented. > > Wouldn't that be the QtDeclarative module ?
No because that requires QML/JavaScript. People want Python/Python and Ruby/Ruby and... > I believe the issue with a > lower > level access is that if a public API is provided, it must be supported. > The > compatibility promise is currently on the QML level - and even there, QML > moves so quickly that you have explicit versioning to avoid > incompatibilities. > A good example is the current move from QML1 to QML2 - while the QML > syntax in > pretty much the same, the underlying C++ code got a massive overhaul. If > you > used the fact that it's on top of QGraphicsView, you could be in trouble, > as > scenegraph is a very different beast. What's wanted is the ability to replace QML/JavaScript with something that calls the same public C++ API that QML/JavaScript does. I don't have a problem if, at this stage, it isn't possible to define that API, and I am more than happy to contribute to the development of Qt5 to make sure it is suitable for Python/Python. I do have a problem if, by the time Qt5 is released, that API hasn't been properly designed and documented. If that is too "difficult" then QML2 is being rushed - just like QML1 was. Phil _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list [email protected] http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
