On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 06:25:59 -0400, Doug Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Phil Thompson wrote: >> On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:29:12 -0700, Glenn Linderman >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On approximately 10/6/2008 10:07 PM, came the following characters >> > from the keyboard of Phil Thompson: >> >> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 21:30:49 -0500, "Arthur Pemberton" >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Take some time with the community, collect opinion on all the bad >> >>> parts of PyQt, and then make a clean break to rewrite PyQt4 for >> >>> Python 2.6, making use of future features whenever possible. >> >> >> >> I definitely won't be targeting 2.6 for anything. The idea that >> >> people will move their 2.x code to 2.6, and then move it again to >> >> 3.0 is, to me, crazy. > > But the idea that people will do a major move to a new PyQt and then do > a major move to Python 3.0 isn't crazy? Personally, I'd rather get it > over with all at once.
Personally, so would I. However this whole discussion started because others said that they'd like to make that decision for themselves. >> > I think PyQt4 as is, with bug fixes if Python 2.6 breaks anything, is >> > adequate for 2.6. >> > >> >> I will set something up to gather opinion and to present my current >> >> thinking. I will particularly need help in identifying individual >> methods >> >> that should be made more Pythonic. > >> >> Note that a side effect of all this is that Python3 support drops down >> >> the >> >> priority list (by a long way) as making PyQt4 for Python2 more >> >> Pythonic >> >> will benefit significantly more users. >> > >> > I can't speak for other users, but I'm mostly interested in seeing >> > something for Py3 for new applications. Note that making PyQt4 on Py2 >> > more Pythonic only helps those users that are willing to make a porting >> > >> > or rewrite investment on that platform. >> > >> > I'd actually rather see a port of PyQt4 to Py3 without (many) new >> > features, and then see the Pythonic rewrite happen there. >> >> I think most people today will be planning to use Python 2 for new >> (non-trivial) developments. Presumably that will change over time. > > But will people sticking with Python 2 be the ones who want to move to > a new, incompatible PyQt??? I know that some would, but I don't know if that is 10% or 90% of people. > Personally, I will be sticking with current PyQt and with Python 2 for > projects that need to be compatible with a wide range of Linux distros. > For personal projects or new large projects that will take time to > stabilize, I'd want the latest and greatest of both. > > I don't know all of the changes you have in mind for a more-pythonic > PyQt, but it seems like QString unification is a major part of it. > Wouldn't it make more sense to combine that with Python 3's new strings? Yes, but it can be done for Python 2's unicode strings as well. Phil _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list PyQt@riverbankcomputing.com http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
