On Wednesday 19 October 2005 8:09 pm, John Layt wrote: > On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 00:17, David Boddie wrote: > > I think that there are two groups of people who expect different things, > > and QString is possibly controversial to many people because it's > > peculiar to see a class that duplicates the functionality of a built-in > > type. However, I think that there's an advantage in being able to write > > code in Python that resembles what you would write in C++. This applies > > to other classes that would appear to duplicate Python built-in types. > > Being a newb here, I could be way off base, but one of the selling points I > keep reading for using PyQt and PyKDE are for rapid prototyping apps that > later get converted to C++. Would getting rid of QStrings not impose a > greater conversion burden on these people and thus alienate them?
As I've said, I have made that selling point many times - mainly as a sop to C++ programmers and avoid religious my-language-is-better-than-yours arguments. However, I don't know of anybody who has actually done it. Phil _______________________________________________ PyKDE mailing list [email protected] http://mats.imk.fraunhofer.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
