[PyQt] Re: PyQt4 and Python 3.0

[Phil Thompson]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 06:25:59 -0400, Doug Bell <dougb at bellz.org> wrote:
> Phil Thompson wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:29:12 -0700, Glenn Linderman
>> <v+python at g.nevcal.com> wrote:
>> > On approximately 10/6/2008 10:07 PM, came the following characters
>> > from the keyboard of Phil Thompson:
>> >> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 21:30:49 -0500, "Arthur Pemberton"
>> >> <pemboa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> Take some time with the community, collect opinion on all the bad
>> >>> parts of PyQt, and then make a clean break to rewrite PyQt4 for
>> >>> Python 2.6, making use of future features whenever possible.
>> >> 
>> >> I definitely won't be targeting 2.6 for anything. The idea that
>> >> people will move their 2.x code to 2.6, and then move it again to
>> >> 3.0 is, to me, crazy.
> 
> But the idea that people will do a major move to a new PyQt and then do
> a major move to Python 3.0 isn't crazy?  Personally, I'd rather get it
> over with all at once.

Personally, so would I. However this whole discussion started because
others said that they'd like to make that decision for themselves.

>> > I think PyQt4 as is, with bug fixes if Python 2.6 breaks anything, is 
>> > adequate for 2.6.
>> > 
>> >> I will set something up to gather opinion and to present my current
>> >> thinking. I will particularly need help in identifying individual
>> methods
>> >> that should be made more Pythonic.
> 
>> >> Note that a side effect of all this is that Python3 support drops
down
>> >> the
>> >> priority list (by a long way) as making PyQt4 for Python2 more
>> >> Pythonic
>> >> will benefit significantly more users.
>> >
>> > I can't speak for other users, but I'm mostly interested in seeing 
>> > something for Py3 for new applications.  Note that making PyQt4 on Py2

>> > more Pythonic only helps those users that are willing to make a
porting
>> >
>> > or rewrite investment on that platform.
>> > 
>> > I'd actually rather see a port of PyQt4 to Py3 without (many) new 
>> > features, and then see the Pythonic rewrite happen there.
>> 
>> I think most people today will be planning to use Python 2 for new
>> (non-trivial) developments. Presumably that will change over time.
> 
> But will people sticking with Python 2 be the ones who want to move to
> a new, incompatible PyQt???

I know that some would, but I don't know if that is 10% or 90% of people.

> Personally, I will be sticking with current PyQt and with Python 2 for
> projects that need to be compatible with a wide range of Linux distros.
> For personal projects or new large projects that will take time to
> stabilize, I'd want the latest and greatest of both.
> 
> I don't know all of the changes you have in mind for a more-pythonic
> PyQt, but it seems like QString unification is a major part of it.
> Wouldn't it make more sense to combine that with Python 3's new strings?

Yes, but it can be done for Python 2's unicode strings as well.

Phil