25.04.2018, 04:42, "d3fault" <[email protected]>: > Supporting Python first class dilutes Qt, please don't. What's next, > Qt for Java? It's one thing to collect community-developed bindings > for various other languages into a single place... but something else > entirely to pay an entire "team" of developers to work on what is > essentially duplicated effort. That money could instead be spent on > new Qt features and/or fixing the ever growing list of bugs > (supporting Python first class will only add to that list of bugs). > Also, will Python/Qt libs be easily usable from Qt/C++? I doubt it, at > least not without deploying a python interpreter (and we already have > to deploy a JavaScript interpreter if we want to use QtQuick). > > Modern C++ has come leaps and bounds over recent years in improving > code simplicity and safety (clang-tidy QtCreator integration FTW)... > whereas afaik Python still crashes if you don't have your WHITESPACE > perfectly organized.... bleh. Simply put, encouraging the use of > Python is the same thing as discouraging the use of Modern, Simple, > and Safe C++.
1. C++ is not modern, not safe, and by far not simple language (despite having a lot of strengths in different areas) 2. A lot of people complain that Qt has very weak support for bindings to languages other than C++, unlike e.g. GTK+ -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
