*** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: [PyQt] ImportError: No module named QtOpenGL

[Danny Pansters]

On Monday 30 April 2007 14:50:29 Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> On 30/04/2007 9.11, Mark Summerfield wrote:
> > But I agree with the general point that using "import *" is reasonable
> > when you have a large library like PyQt4---providing that library has
> > sensible export behaviour. For example, I _assume_ that the PyQt4
> > libraries will only export things with names matching /Q[A-Z]\w+/ and
> > would expect anything that didn't have such a name either not to be
> > exported or to have a special prefix such as "qt" to avoid unpleasant
> > surprises.
>
> Well, I had always assumed this as well, but it looks like we were both
> wrong
>
> :) The QTextStream non member functions
>
> (http://doc.trolltech.com/4.2/qtextstream.html#related-non-members) are not
> qualified in any way, and, worse, there are two named "hex" and "oct".
>
> Anyway, not that I care specifically: I'm going to prod the trolls about
> this issue (it's really unconvenient in C++ as well).

<prodded troll>
Well, the main dislike about the "consolidated" module for me is that unless 
it contains all pyqt4 modules it can never be clear which ones are really 
present on a given box. It will depend on packaging (by 3rd parties), or even 
worse packaging or source building by 3rd parties where the modules are split 
up or are build-time settings. So it will be a very unportable thing to use. 
For that reason alone its use should be discouraged. Namespace clashes are 
second to that IMHO.

Needless to say that my py-qt4-* ports for FreeBSD (yes, split up) don't 
provide the consolidated module. Once you split the modules into seperate 
packages, managing a consolidated module is a package-list nightmare. It can 
be touched/changed by any of the py-qt4-* packages that are installed or 
updated afterwards. Another reason to not use the metamodule :)
</prodded troll>

IMHO,

Dan