Can we use http://code.google.com/p/pybindgen/ ?
Lucas A. Tanure Alves
+55 (19) 88176559
___
PySide mailing list
PySide@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/pyside
On 1/15/13 2:25 AM, ZHONG Zhu wrote:
It's a pain when I started to work on a Shiboken binding to move my project
to Python based. I've been trying to do a binding with Shiboken on Windows
for months but can't make it work. I believe Shiboken is working or people
can't build the PySide
Hi,
i thing before going to technical details about how to implement new
shiboken there should answered some questions:
1. Who will actually develop and support the development ?
2. Is Digia interested to sponsor development ?
2013/1/13 anatoly techtonik techto...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 13,
On 1/12/13 5:52 PM, Fabien Castan wrote:
*The email « PySide is dead ? » has given rise to an interesting
discussion about the evolution of PySide. The conclusion is that there
is currently really limited contribution on the project, and shiboken
seems to be a really big and hard task to
On 1/14/13 12:18 PM, Fabien Castan wrote:
I'm not enthusiastic about a rewrite using swig; it seems to be a lot of
work for questionable benefits.
The main benefit could be to get a bigger community and concentrate
efforts on the binding rules, instead of working on a binding tool.
FYI current wxPython is based on SWIG, next version is using SIP.
AFAIK SWIG is not python specific which makes it sub-optimal.
Another option is CXXI http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2011/Dec-19.html which
looks very similar to shiboken.
Niki
--
| (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste
|
On 1/14/13 4:36 PM, Robin Dunn wrote:
On 1/14/13 1:40 PM, Николай wrote:
FYI current wxPython is based on SWIG, next version is using SIP.
AFAIK SWIG is not python specific which makes it sub-optimal.
Indeed. I am very happily leaving SWIG behind as the code generated by
SIP is smaller,
I've been using Qt for a while but I'm a newbie to PySide. To me, PySide it's a
brilliant product because of its Python syntax and all these Qt experience I
had could be reused. Writing code with PySide is always an happy experience for
me and I do like it.
It's a pain when I started to work
I am curious, what is the project you are working on that uses C++
widgets, SWIG, and PySide?
It's an internal software, that mainly mixes a video editing and a 3D
software.
And like in maya, nuke,... users could customize the application in python
and creates their own widgets using PySide.
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Fabien Castan fabcas...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally like the idea of using SWIG to build Qt bindings. SWIG is
the only tool I have ever used to interface C++ and Python, and it seemed
fine. All of the alternatives to SWIG seemed worse.
For those who don't
Hi,
2013/1/13 anatoly techtonik techto...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Fabien Castan fabcas...@gmail.comwrote:
I personally like the idea of using SWIG to build Qt bindings. SWIG is
the only tool I have ever used to interface C++ and Python, and it seemed
fine. All of the
I personally like the idea of using SWIG to build Qt bindings. SWIG is
the only tool I have ever used to interface C++ and Python, and it seemed
fine. All of the alternatives to SWIG seemed worse.
For those who don't know, PyQt uses SIP. SIP is similar to SWIG in many
ways.
Compared to
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Fabien Castan fabcas...@gmail.com wrote:
I personally like the idea of using SWIG to build Qt bindings. SWIG is
the only tool I have ever used to interface C++ and Python, and it seemed
fine. All of the alternatives to SWIG seemed worse.
For those who don't
Are people from Shiboken not interested to work on Swig? Why?
I see the reason to eliminate boost python. Is there a reason to
eliminate Swig?
I guess the same reason applies.
http://web.archive.org/web/20120311172636/http://www.pyside.org/docs/shiboken/faq.html
The sentence is: The main
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Fabien Castan fabcas...@gmail.com wrote:
Are people from Shiboken not interested to work on Swig? Why?
I see the reason to eliminate boost python. Is there a reason to
eliminate Swig?
I guess the same reason applies.
I don't see the point. Using the rst format and tools like sphinx is a
great thing.
It doesn't depend on the binding tool and you don't need to write your
application in python to use it.
readthedocs.org https://readthedocs.org/ is a great solution to
maintain it automatically.
Another
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Matthew Brett matthew.br...@gmail.comwrote:
Am I right that the current plausible options for the longer term
maintainability of PySide are:
1) Hope for someone to rewrite shiboken in Python
2) Write a new set of Qt bindings in swig?
And that no-one has
I can help too. But I prefer to use python for the new Shiboken. If someone
of pyside give me a direction on rewrite Shiboken with Python3, I can start
right now.
I know C/C++ and python2/3, so I can understand Shiboken.
Lucas A. Tanure Alves
+55 (19) 88176559
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Fabien Castan fabcas...@gmail.com wrote:
Are people from Shiboken not interested to work on Swig? Why?
I see the reason to eliminate boost python. Is there a reason to
eliminate Swig?
I guess the same reason applies.
*Hi,
The email « PySide is dead ? » has given rise to an interesting discussion
about the evolution of PySide. The conclusion is that there is currently
really limited contribution on the project, and shiboken seems to be a
really big and hard task to maintain.
The idea to rewrite shiboken with
Hello Fabien,
I am curious, what is the project you are working on that uses C++
widgets, SWIG, and PySide?
I personally like the idea of using SWIG to build Qt bindings. SWIG is
the only tool I have ever used to interface C++ and Python, and it
seemed fine. All of the alternatives to SWIG
21 matches
Mail list logo
