On Friday 13 August 2010 11:46:55 Lauro Moura wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Marcelo Lira
>
> wrote:
> > I hate all of you guys. :)
> > (Lauro, -0.5!?)
> > But I'm convinced, no dynamic Qt properties using the constructor.
> :
> :)
>
> +1 - I'm ok with it.
> +0.5 - Seems good, but co
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Marcelo Lira
wrote:
> I hate all of you guys. :)
> (Lauro, -0.5!?)
> But I'm convinced, no dynamic Qt properties using the constructor.
>
:)
+1 - I'm ok with it.
+0.5 - Seems good, but could be/must be improved.
0 - Undecided
-0.5 - Somewhat against, but the pro
I hate all of you guys. :)
(Lauro, -0.5!?)
But I'm convinced, no dynamic Qt properties using the constructor.
On 13 August 2010 08:37, Lauro Moura wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:01 AM, Mark Summerfield wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:37:12 -0300
>> Marcelo Lira wrote:
>>> According to PSEP
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:01 AM, Mark Summerfield wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:37:12 -0300
> Marcelo Lira wrote:
>> According to PSEP 101[1] a constructor for QObject and derived classes
>> should be able to set Qt properties through named arguments.
>> In practical terms to set the Qt propert
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:37:12 -0300
Marcelo Lira wrote:
> According to PSEP 101[1] a constructor for QObject and derived classes
> should be able to set Qt properties through named arguments.
> In practical terms to set the Qt property "objectName" to "foobar" one
> should do:
>
> obj = QObject(ob
On 12.08.2010 23:37, ext Marcelo Lira wrote:
Now, the point of this email is to change PSEP 101 to allow the
QObject (and derived types) constructor to accept setting dynamic Qt
properties. PyQt and the current PSEP 101 only provide this for
already existing Qt properties, while QObject.setPrope
In my option the correct behavior is not support dynamic properties on
constructors, because this can cause a lot of mistakes, and the programmer
can generate bugs without knowing.
with QObject.serProperty at least you have the return value to verify if you
do this wrong, If support dynamic propert
My humble opinion still stands nevertheless ;-)
Carlos Gonçalves
On 2010/08/12, at 22:12, Marcelo Lira wrote:
> Oh, no, I'm a bad communicator!
> I was supporting to allow setting dynamic Qt properties.
> The "no special cases" I referred to was not treat differently
> existing and dynamic Qt pr
Oh, no, I'm a bad communicator!
I was supporting to allow setting dynamic Qt properties.
The "no special cases" I referred to was not treat differently
existing and dynamic Qt properties, and having to explain to the
developer to avoid using the dynamics because we don't trust him (the
developer, n
Hi,
On 2010/08/12, at 21:37, Marcelo Lira wrote:
> We had a short discussion on #pyside IRC channel and one point of
> prohibiting the setting of dynamic properties using the constructor
> would allow the programmer to make mistakes without knowing. Mistakes
> such as
>
> obj = QObject(objectnam
According to PSEP 101[1] a constructor for QObject and derived classes
should be able to set Qt properties through named arguments.
In practical terms to set the Qt property "objectName" to "foobar" one
should do:
obj = QObject(objectName='foobar')
This can be done in a more verbose way:
obj = Q
11 matches
Mail list logo
