On Thursday 17 February 2005 11:45 pm, Gerard Vermeulen wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:59:53 - (GMT)
> "Phil Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [ .. ]
>
> > >> A self-installing
> > >> binary package, with the Qt libraries statically linked
> > >
> > > Is there a reason for being statica
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 08:02:47 -0800
"Longson, Joe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think we are all arguing from the same side of the issue.
>
> I agree that namespaces are important, I'm just asking several questions:
>
> 1. Why add an additional namespace for qt4 related functionality (we
>
I think we are all arguing from the same side of the issue.
I agree that namespaces are important, I'm just asking several questions:
1. Why add an additional namespace for qt4 related functionality (we
didn't do this for qt3)? In terms of code maintainability, it will
actually save me time
On Friday 18 February 2005 01:32, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> All Qt names have the form Q+english word(s)
Most do, but not all. PYSIGNAL, IO_Open, bitBlt, qRed, etc
Im sure you were aware of some of those, but the problem with
from X import *
is that you need to be aware of _all_ of them.
Your appr
Ulrich Berning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using from ... import * in normal code is (and was) always a bad
> idea. I have avoided it whenever possible. You pollute your local
> namespace with
> all names from the imported modules and name clashes are are likely to
> occur.
You probably did not
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:59:53 - (GMT)
"Phil Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ .. ]
>
> >> A self-installing
> >> binary package, with the Qt libraries statically linked
> >
> > Is there a reason for being statically linked? Thats a complication for
> > third
> > party python modules that
Giovanni Bajo schrieb:
Just one personale note: right now, I usually do:
from qt import *
because I find it useless to write "qt.QApplication" instead of
"QApplication" since the leading uppercase "Q" is already a kind of
namespace, which is imposed by qt itself. If (by absurd) the class was named
On Thursday 17 February 2005 08:30, Phil Thompson wrote:
> > Phil Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The separate Qt v4 libraries will be wrapped as separate Python modules.
> >> The module names will be the same as the corresponding library (eg.
> >> QtCore, QtGui) and be grouped as a single
> On Thursday 17 February 2005 15:22, Phil Thompson wrote:
>> I've put up a short roadmap for PyQt v4 on the website, and the text is
>> below. Any comments welcome.
>
> That looks great.
>
>> A GPL version of PyQt for Windows will be supported.
>
> You dont say it, but I assume the commercial vers
On Thursday 17 February 2005 15:22, Phil Thompson wrote:
> I've put up a short roadmap for PyQt v4 on the website, and the text is
> below. Any comments welcome.
That looks great.
> A GPL version of PyQt for Windows will be supported.
You dont say it, but I assume the commercial version will be
> Phil Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The separate Qt v4 libraries will be wrapped as separate Python modules.
>> The module names will be the same as the corresponding library (eg.
>> QtCore, QtGui) and be grouped as a single Python package called PyQt4.
>> The
>> suggested programming s
Agreed... But we are supporting a large body of code that already has
many "import qt" and "from qt import *" statements throughout the
code... Having a more standardized way of handling this (rather than
providing a 'qt.py' file for every project that uses pyqt) would be
much preferrable...
Phil Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The separate Qt v4 libraries will be wrapped as separate Python modules.
> The module names will be the same as the corresponding library (eg.
> QtCore, QtGui) and be grouped as a single Python package called PyQt4. The
> suggested programming style for n
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 08:05:49AM -0800, Longson, Joe wrote:
> >The separate Qt v4 libraries will be wrapped as separate Python modules.
> >The module names will be the same as the corresponding library (eg.
> >QtCore, QtGui) and be grouped as a single Python package called PyQt4. The
> >suggested
Would we be required to use the from PyQt4 import QtGui?
The existing namespace allows us to do "import qt" Could a similar
facility be provided? (for maintaining more code compatibility)
e.g.
In qt.py --
from PyQt4 import *
from PyQt4.QtGui import *
...
Then we could do something li
Phil Thompson wrote:
I've put up a short roadmap for PyQt v4 on the website, and the text is
below. Any comments welcome.
Phil
Very good news. I applaud your decision
and your continuing commitment to PyQt.
Thanks
___
PyKDE mailing listPyKDE@mats.imk.
I've put up a short roadmap for PyQt v4 on the website, and the text is
below. Any comments welcome.
Phil
PyQt v4 will support Qt v4 only. It will not support earlier versions of
Qt in the way that PyQt v3 supports Qt v1 to v3. PyQt v3 will continue to
be supported.
PyQt v4 will require SIP v4.
17 matches
Mail list logo