Patrick Hartling wrote: > On Feb 13, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Marcus Lindblom wrote: > >> Patrick Hartling wrote: >> >>> Overall, I get the >>> impression that PyOpenSG is not even supposed to expose >>> the ...FieldMask and ...FieldId members of OpenSG classes to Python, >>> but this has not been handled consistently. >> Are you sure? Isn't that a good idea to have if you're debugging >> aspect/changelist stuff from Python? >> >> OTOH, you could do that from C++ instead, but... >> >> Or am I just wishing without knowing what I'm getting? :) > > I made that statement based on what is in PyOpenSG's gen_bindings.py > file. The comment reads as follows: > > # Hide all Mask variables > # - these don't expose well and osg2 will not have them anyway > > I think that the "don't expose well" part probably has to do with the > unresolved symbol problems. As for "osg2", I don't know if that refers > to the Python extension module itself or to OpenSG 2.
Ok. I think the FieldMask is gone, but isn't the FieldId should be in there? (That was what I jumped on most. :) Cheers /Marcus ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ Opensg-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
