[pygtk] Turning the PyGTK+ brand into something more than it currently is

[Giuseppe Penone]

Hi Simon,

On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Giuseppe Penone <giuspen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I read that there's no need of reference because gtk3 reference is
>> enough, well I'm a gtk3 and gtkmm3 developer over a pygtk developer (my
>> most used app is www.giuspen.com/cherrytree) but still I miss pygtk
>> reference when doing something in PyGobject.
>>
>
> I'm curious where you read this as I think the idea should be squashed. Or
> perhaps the statement is being misinterpreted? The current gtk3 C
> docs/annotations should be "enough", but using them to generate python
> specific docs still needs to happen (more below).
>

I read it here https://live.gnome.org/PyGObject/IntrospectionPorting

and exactly the section is:

The C API by and large remains valid in Python (and other languages using
the GI bindings), in particular the structure, order, and data types of
arguments. There are a few exceptions which are mostly due to the different
way Python works, and in some cases to make it easier to write code in
Python; see below for details. But this means that you can (and should) use
the normal API documentation for the C API of the library.
devhelp<https://live.gnome.org/devhelp>is your friend!

I'm happy anyway that something is moving either in the reference and in
the porting to windows.

Cheers,
Giuseppe.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.daa.com.au/pipermail/pygtk/attachments/20121118/1a2fde2d/attachment.html>