Hi Chris,

For Master I'd go with python 2 or 3, it seems to be very little 
difference writing for both.

http://python-future.org/compatible_idioms.html

And for PyQT I'd vote for 5.

as others have said 2.7 and wheezy are in the past.

Just my 2.625 cents.

JT


On 4/18/2017 3:55 AM, Chris Morley wrote:
> I've been working on a branch that would supply linuxcnc with a python QT 
> based vcp program.
>
> This is capable of GLADEvcp type panels and operator screens including python 
> handler files.
>
> Qt seems to be the future of GUIs
>
>
> The questions I am wonder on are:
>
>
> python 2 or 3 ?
>
>
> PYQT4 or 5 ?
>
>
> Currently it's built with python 2 and PYQT4.
>
>
> My personal opinion is that I see little reason to use python 3 yet - it 
> seems many libraries are slow to switch.
>
>
> QT5 is not available in wheezy but is available in Mint (a fairly common used 
> distribution)
>
> Looks like debian Jessie has PYQT5 in both styles of python.
>
>
> So to use QT5 we would not be able to use QTvcp in wheezy and  i would need 
> some make file help
>
> to juggle when to build and not.
>
>
> I haven't read any significant  differences between qt4/5 I just would like 
> to future proof the work.
>
> it's really disappointing the debacle of GTK2 and 3.
>
>
> Opinions other comments?
>
>
> Chris M
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Emc-developers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to