Hi, Marcus Lindblom wrote: > 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. :)
not quite, they aren't that exposed anymore as the beginEdit/endEdit calls are gone, but if you start for example to implement changed callbacks from python you will have to be aware of the masks as they tell you which field changed. And internally they are still heavily in use. kind regards, gerrit ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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
