On 12/10/12 12:24 PM, Henry Gomersall wrote: > I suppose my point is that the entirety of Pyside should (in an ideal > world) be just a list of mappings from C++ types to Python types. The > heavy lifting should be left for a common tool. You're saying that is > where the bugs are?
One of the difficult parts about binding Qt or any substantial C or C++ code base is handling object life cycle. In C++, an object allocated on the heap is alive from the time between when new runs until delete runs and an object on the stack is alive until it goes out of scope (I'm simplifying here). In an arbitrary C++ program, there are few rules than govern when new and delete can be called. Qt defines some common classes (e.g. QObject) and some rules that govern when objects are deleted. I'm sure that a large part of the work that went into PySide was to manage the lifetime and behavior of Python wrapper objects based on how Qt works. This sort of code is Qt specific and not generic. Better generic mapping support can help here, but there will always be Qt specific support (or gtk / GObject specific or win32 api specific or ...) that needs to be implemented. Cheers, John _______________________________________________ PySide mailing list PySide@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/pyside
