Hi! 2011/1/10 Matti Airas <[email protected]>: > On 10.01.2011 06:11, ext Dan Lee wrote: >> from the previous posts to the list about this last summer, it seems >> like it's on hold for after 1.0, but it'll be in the works afterwards.. >> is that right? otherwise is there a voting procedure for PSEPs for users >> to add a +1? the wordy property syntax seems to stick out the most for >> me as a python user using pyside (as opposed to a c++ dev learning >> python with pyside) > > That PSEP has been left a bit hanging in mid-air because the proposed > changes aren't backwards-compatible. Personally, I love the concept, but I'm > really not sure how such backwards-incompatible changes should be performed. > If we had plenty of worthwhile changes queued up and unlimited resources > :-), we could aim for doing an API-incompatible PySide 2.0 with all those > changes there. However, real life strongly pushes us towards more gradual > changes. > > So, I wonder could we come up with a clean way of switching on the property > syntax without unconditionally breaking the backwards compatibility and > without destroying the implementation efficiency and/or maintainability? > This would make it much easier to roll out this and other similar features.
Would something like Python's own "from __future__ import ..." help there? You would still need to ship both "variants" (the old one and the new one), but if an import could pull all switches so that the new behaviour is activated, would that work? Alternatively, if it's easy to implement (and the resources are available) what about creating a "PySide playground" where such features are implemented and can be tested by the community, so that when the time for a possible PySide 2.0 comes, we know what features work and are useful and just have to move the working, useful playground feature into the stable release. HTH. Thomas _______________________________________________ PySide mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openbossa.org/listinfo/pyside
