On Monday 17 January 2011 13:07:35 Matti Airas wrote: > On 14.01.2011 17:35, ext Fars- mo wrote: > I'm speaking mostly just for myself, but I think it's always a balancing > act between maintaining compatibility with C++ Qt and PyQt, and > improving the API. I believe compatiblity should have a very high > priority, but not at all costs (hence, renaming of pyqtSignal to Signal, > etc.). Any changes should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
My opinion about those enhancement suggestions: > [1] http://bugs.openbossa.org/show_bug.cgi?id=606 Better than a toTuple method is to add the possibility to create tuples from those objects, e.g.: p = QPoint(1, 2) t = tuple(p) # (1,2) It's better because it doesn't add any "visible" method to the API, besides being beauty IMO =] > [2] http://bugs.openbossa.org/show_bug.cgi?id=607 It's something that you can use on your projects but not necessarily need to be on PySide itself, IMO your attempt to simplify the code failed, not by your bad, but because the original code is already too simple. > [3] http://bugs.openbossa.org/show_bug.cgi?id=615 I agree with Matti, there's no need to add yet another incompatibility with PyQt for basically no gain at all. > Cheers, > > ma. > _______________________________________________ > PySide mailing list > PySide@lists.openbossa.org > http://lists.openbossa.org/listinfo/pyside -- Hugo Parente Lima INdT - Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ PySide mailing list PySide@lists.openbossa.org http://lists.openbossa.org/listinfo/pyside
