[pygtk] PyGObject directory issue again, taking a stand

Tomeu Vizoso tomeu at sugarlabs.org
Tue Nov 23 22:03:50 WST 2010

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 13:46, Dieter Verfaillie
<dieterv at optionexplicit.be> wrote:
> Quoting "Tomeu Vizoso" <tomeu at sugarlabs.org>:
>>>  Building on the above, we could have part of a reliably method to
>>>  detect [2] if the static bindings get imported but you already have
>>>  imported gi (but not necessarily the inverse!) and raise a
>>>  warning/error 'you should not mix the old static bindings with the
>>>  new introspected bindings'.
>> It can be a bit tricky because the problem is only with mixing
>> wrappers for the same classes. As in, using the static bindings for
>> GStreamer in an app that uses Gtk+ through introspection should be
>> safe.
> It's not up to me to decide anything, but is a kludge like that really
> planned to be supported? Maybe I missed the point of the whole gi effort,
> I thought the goal was that static bindings will be abandoned in favor of
> introspection... Looks like I have some more reading to do ;)

Why would that be a kludge? For maintainability reasons, I tend myself
to introspection-only, but some people (actually, gstreamer
developers) have shown concern about the extra overhead during
invocation because there are server-side users of gstreamer that don't
care much about startup cpu and memory usage.



More information about the pygtk mailing list