On Thursday 02 March 2006 2:26 pm, Gerard Vermeulen wrote: > On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 12:42:42 +0100 > > Sundance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:41:45AM +0000, Phil Thompson wrote: > > > A C++ namespace doesn't have an implementation, it just contributes to > > > name mangling. In Python they have to be implemented by something so > > > there is no direct comparison. > > > > Point! Although I feel Giovanni does have a point as well. Having > > DIFFERENT Qt namespaces lying around is super ungood. Recipe for pain, > > that. I think this is one of those cases where we should polish things > > into submission manually if need there. > > I have been wondering for some time if it wouldn't be better to merge > QtCore and QtGui into one single module. This resolves the problem of the > Qt namespace clashes. Eventually there could be a QtCore module for people > who really only need QtCore (how many?). > > I see the value of the module prefixes, but the separation in QtCore, > QtGui, QtOpenGL is very verbose and I agree that it does not improve > readability.
I'm not going to break the 1:1 relationship between the module and the corresponding Qt library. I'm not going to throw away the benefits that Qt4 introduced by splitting Qt into separate libraries. Phil _______________________________________________ PyKDE mailing list PyKDE@mats.imk.fraunhofer.de http://mats.imk.fraunhofer.de/mailman/listinfo/pykde
