2 ms·
Maybe it's not pythonic but I can assure you, after having passed 6 years working with it that it's extremely efficient and very well integrated with python. It
by wiz21c 8y ago
Maybe it's not pythonic but I can assure you, after having passed 6 years working with it that it's extremely efficient and very well integrated with python. It just works, and a complaint about aesthetics won't change that :-)
- sevensor 8y agoI second that. Maybe the interface isn't very Pythonic, but it's very Qt-ic, if that's a word. The behavior of PyQt hews closely to the behavior described in Qt's excellent C++ documentation. Furthermore, PyQt lets you do things that you may take for granted, like connecting signals to Python functions and subclassing Qt Widgets. And not only can you subclass a Qt Widget, you can override its methods. Also, you can send a Python str to any method that accepts a QString. I could go on and on about how the boring stuff stays pleasantly boring. Having used much worse Python bindings for other C++ libraries, the degree to which PyQt just works without blowing up in your face is itself pretty astonishing. Add to that the maturity and depth of the Qt Widget library, and the result is a real pleasure to use.
- yellowapple 8y agoMy first foray with Qt was also my first (serious) foray with Python, so it was easy for me to ignore pythonicity and just write something that approximately resembles Qt's existing style. Knowing some of my coworkers, though (who use Python daily), I can understand why it'd be jarring.