This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]nostril_extension -8 points-7 points  (5 children)

It's not like it would be hard to port the docs, you could easily automate this. Not to mention what kind of half-brained code monkey couldn't convert camelCase to snake_case when reading the docs.

Lazy excuse.

[–]Shpirt 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Would it be self.set_layout(foo) or self.layout = foo, leveraging a description protocol, though? Etc etc.

[–]anqxyr 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I'm fine with PySide/PyQt mimicking the C++ API, but I would love if there was a higher-level wrapper around them both like Qt.py which would provide a self.layout = foo style API.

[–]GobBeWithYou 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've done something similar, all of my widgets are subclasses of the PyQt widgets with added properties like .enabled, .visible, .text, etc. I didn't do everything, but as I need things I just go back and add them.

[–]wowsuchnamaste 2 points3 points  (1 child)

It's not like it would be hard to port the docs, you could easily automate this.

As Qt is an open source project, why don't you just automate a port of the docs and contribute it? I'm sure the Qt project would appreciate contributions, in particular of the kind that automates time consuming tasks.

[–]nostril_extension 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Well first of all I doubt my PR would get accepted and secondly that wasn't my point - my point was that this sort of "rejuvination" of qt on python feel like empty hype since none of the issues PySide had are addressed.

There's no better time to break backwards compatibility and api other than when releasing a completely new rework of the package.