[PyKDE] Next Releases of SIP, PyQt and QScintilla

[Phil Thompson]

> Phil Thompson schrieb:
>
>>I plan to release new versions of SIP, PyQt and QScintilla some time next
>>week. The current snapshots can be treated as release candidates.
>>
>>There have been a number of subtle changes under the covers - now would
>> be
>>a good time to test with your favorite apps.
>>
>>QScintilla translations need updating again for the new batch file lexer
>> -
>>blame Detlev ;)
>>
>>Phil
>>
>>
>>
> I have a minor wish for the final release (if it's not too late).
> PyQt's configure.py script sets opt_qsciincdir to the default value
> sipcfg.qt_inc_dir (this is normally $QTDIR/include). This is the
> directory, where configure.py looks for the qscintilla header files. I
> don't like to pollute Qt's include directory with a number of non-Qt
> header files, so I always put them into a subdirectory named "Qext" in
> $QTDIR/include and use the -n flag when running configure.py. I do the
> same for the qwt header files ("Qwt") and for the header files of my own
> widget library ("Qds").
>
> Phil, what do you think about changing the default value of
> opt_qsciincdir to os.path.join(sipcfg.qt_inc_dir, "Qext")?
> What do other people think about it?

I don't like it - unless the default QScintilla installation directories
are changed as you suggest below.

> Another pure cosmetic point (and not for the next release) is the name
> "qext" for the module containing the bindings for qscintilla. I think
> this name is inappropriate. At least for me, this name implies "a
> collection of (Py)Qt related extensions", but in fact it contains only
> the qscintilla classes. Wouldn't it be better to rename this to "qsci"
> (and "Qsci" for the include directory) in a future release? What are
> your opinions?

The use of qext in PyQt can easily be changed - for PyQt4 anyway.

It reflects the use of Qext as a prefix for the C++ classes. This follows
Trolltech's guidelines and I adopted it to be a good citizen. I soon
realised that nobody else was following it. I also realised that the
reason nobody else was following it was that it was a dumb idea.

I wish I'd used Qsci instead of QextScintilla, but it's more difficult to
change - particularly as I expect the same QScintilla source to support
both Qt3 and Qt4. I suppose I could provide old-prefix and new-prefix
versions of the source - given my internal build systems this wouldn't be
a maintenance overhead.

Phil