On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 11:55:59 +0200, Florian Friesdorf <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 10:51:27AM +0100, Phil Thompson wrote: >> On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 11:46:59 +0200, Florian Friesdorf <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > a = QAction() >> >> > a.setEnabled(True) >> >> > enabled = a.isEnabled() >> >> > (..) >> >> > >> >> > Preferably these would look something like: >> >> > >> >> > a = QAction() >> >> > a.enabled = True >> >> > enabled = a.enabled >> >> >> >> This is fairly easy to implement but would be an incompatible change. >> > >> > I wouldn't like having my code rely on a specially built PyQt. Is it >> > possible to generate these bindings as extra add-on modules? >> >> They'd have to be replacements not add ons. > > Only, iff there is a collision between those APIs, or? > In the above example, at least, it should work to have them both, > eventually using nasty monkey-patching.
Yes, but it isn't a typical example. Qt tends to use setThing() and thing(), so the getter method would be incompatible with the property name. Phil _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list [email protected] http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
