On Wednesday 28 April 2010 15:46:47 Matti Airas wrote:
> > Another point, this time regarding keyword arguments, I guess that we
> > should follow Qt names, not the PyQt names, ok, I must admit that I'm
> > saying this just because follow the Qt ones is easier to implement,
> > hehehe, because the C++ parser knows  the Qt argument names, but not the
> > PyQt ones. Anyway I guess that PyQt is using the Qt argument names.
>
> In my opinion following the Qt names would be a sensible default.

The question is actually not about the defaults, but how to handle changes - 
that will in turn determine the relation to PyQt (in this sense, this is not 
really a PyQt API compatibility question, but rather a binding backwards 
compatibility question). There are plenty of new Qt classes, especially in 
the Declarative/QtMobility segment which might present such cases.

Regards,
Attila
_______________________________________________
PySide mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openbossa.org/listinfo/pyside

Reply via email to