Hi:
Given all the discussion from everyone else, it seems that the main
idea is to keep the bindings separate from each other, so they don't
conflict with past/future programs.
So maybe what we need is a central Qt module, but one where we will be
able to do something like:
use Qt ('4');
to load Qt version 4's bindings, maybe under a different namespace,
like Qt4. Then that module could do some magic to re-map itself under
Qt's main namespace, so upgrading between mostly compatible API's
would be as trivial as switching the use Qt statement and bumping it
up, then dealing with the "no such function" warnings (hopefully
people don't often completely change the semantics of a given
function).
This definitely warrants some more thought & discussion.
Cheers,
Jonathan
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Peter Pentchev <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 06:00:12PM -0700, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
>> # from Jonathan Yu
>> # on Monday 25 May 2009:
>>
>> >I'd like to remove the Qt module from CPAN, or be able to take it
>> > over.
>>
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>> That's a good question in general, but for Qt4, I'm inclined to say that
>> a better approach would be to use the 'Qt4::' namespace.
>>
>> >I'm working with someone else on perlqt4 bindings for my Google Summer
>> >of Code project, and the currently available version of Qt is from
>> >1997 and of little use to anybody. (See: code.google.com/p/perlqt4)
> [snip]
>>
>> From my tinkering with it thus-far, it appears that Qt3 and Qt4 are
>> quite different APIs. That is, current Perl code written for Qt (3)
>> won't "just work", right?
>
> Errrrrm... I don't think that the Qt module written in 1997 would
> support Qt 3 :)
>
> Actually, from the module's README file:
>
> This release, PerlQt 0.03, is distributed under the LGPL and requires
> Qt-1.1 and Perl 5.004 (or a beta version). I have only successfully
> compiled PerlQt myself on my own RedHat Linux 4.0 system with a 2.0.28
> kernel, running Perl-5.00390, which is a beta-release of Perl-5.004.
>
> I really don't think anyone ought to worry about backwards compatibility
> with the Qt module currently on CPAN :)
>
> G'luck,
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter Pentchev [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
> PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
> Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
> This would easier understand fewer had omitted.
>
