Re: Python bindings using cppyy (was: An update on Python bindings)

Luca Beltrame <[email protected]> Mon, 15 Jan 2018 09:24:26 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.kde.devel.kwrite,gmane.comp.kde.devel.bindings,gmane.comp.kde.devel.core,gmane.comp.kde.devel.frameworks
Organization	KDE e.V.
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Il giorno Sat, 13 Jan 2018 18:05:45 +0000
Shaheed Haque <[email protected]> ha scritto:

Hello Shaheed,

>    1. The packaging has advanced to the point where I think ECM-based
>    framework-by-framework bindings are a real possibility, with both

That's absolutely fantastic. Thanks for the continued effort!

>    4. For me, the jury is still out on PyQt versus a new set of
> cppyy-based Qt bindings. Clearly PyQt is solid and mature, but the

How do the bindings work? I suppose you'll need cppyy-based Qt to run
your bindings, correct?

> like finding a way to express the object ownership/destruction rules

How are you dealing with Python's GC? A major point (and PITA) when
developing with PyQt and PyKDE4 was that a single slip in tracking
objects meant the C++ object would get GC'd under your feet,
causing crashes. This was particularly bad with the Plasma bindings
because they would crash the whole desktop. 

> benefit *for the bindings*, I'll drop P2. One possible such benefit

I don't mind either approach: FYI though, most major distros are
phasing out Py2-as-default (Ubuntu, Arch, and openSUSE are the ones I'm
aware of). 

> minimal customisation (known as Pythonisations in cppyy parlance)
> such as for #4 above, but nothing like the scale needed for SIP.

That would be great. It was one of the major issues when keeping PyKDE4
up to date.

> look for help to get an ECM equivalent, possibly based on the same
> approach but perhaps including CI and distribution via PyPi.

Can you link the repository with the tools? 

-- 
Luca Beltrame, Ph.D.
Translational Genomics Unit, Department of Oncology
IRCCS Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche "Mario Negri"

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 488 B)