OK, I've thought about this again and we've discussed it here, and we
agree with the proposed change. As Bryan said it's really just a change
from an underscore to a dot, which makes perfect sense in the Python
world. In fact, I now think this is a rather vital change that should be
made as soon as possible.
Also, converting our current code will be trivial, so we're not worried
about that aspect of it.
+1
Arthur Magill wrote:
For example:
OCC.BRep.BRep_Builder() -> OCC.BRep.Builder()
OCC.BRepPrimAPI.BRepPrimAPI_MakeBox() -> OCC.BRepPrimAPI.MakeBox()
OCC.Geom.Handle_Geom_Circle() -> OCC.Geom.Handle_Circle()
OCC.Geom.Geom_Circle() -> OCC.Geom.Circle()
OCC.gp.gp_Pnt() -> OCC.gp.Pnt()
That's what I understood :-)
I don't regard this as a deviation of from the C++ API. Ultimately, it's
a consistent translation from "_" (C++ API) to "." (python API).
I think it's a minor deviation - one that is entirely acceptable.
As Jelle said:
> Its *absolutely* an important issue that the SWIG wrappers ( Level1 )
> feel like the C++ api, you're absolutely right.
This change is obvious and small enough that we'll still be 'true' to
the original API.
It's because of the importance of API stability that I want to make this
proposal now (maybe it's already too late. That's why I'm asking).
It's fair to expect anything below 0.5 (or some other arbitrary low
number) to be a little unstable. Thus far, I don't think any of us have
managed to write anything big enough that this change would be a serious
PITA (or maybe I'm wrong...).
I'm grateful for the feedback on this. I don't want to spend time on a
patch which will ultimately be unacceptable to the rest of the pythonOCC
devs/users.
If you've got the time/knowledge, I'd like to see this change.
A
_______________________________________________
Pythonocc-users mailing list
Pythonocc-users@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/pythonocc-users
