On Tuesday 03 October 2006 06:58, Richard_Dale@tipitina.demon.co.uk wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 October 2006 14:29, Luciano Montanaro wrote:
> > On Sunday 01 October 2006 20:40, Stephen Leaf wrote:
> > > On Sunday 01 October 2006 7:31 am, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 01 October 2006 13:00, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > > I don't think it would be possible to reach a consensus on this
> > > > > one: python <-> ruby <-> java <-> c# ...
> > > >
> > > > We want a script language, so Java and C# are out of consideration,
> > > > the added value compared to C++ just isn't worth it. So it's between
> > > > Python and Ruby (at least we all agree that Perl is a no-go :-) ).
> > >
> > > not everyone, I hate the python syntax. And as for ruby syntax?.. I've
> > > seen scribbles that were more readable. Maybe it was just the examples
> > > on the official page I dunno but it just churned my stomach.
> > > I personally prefer Perl out of those 3 choices.
> >
> > What is the state of Perl bindings?
>
> There is no work going into the Qt4 version of PerlQt, although it wouln't
> take a huge amount of effort to adapt the Qt4 QtRuby bindings.
>

I have the old perlqt bindings working for qt4.  Signals and slots work, but 
only a small portion of the classes are wrapped, and all the 
auto-figure-out-what-features-your-qt-has is ripped out.  So it would still 
require a lot of work to get them up to release quality, and I HATE perl, so 
I'm not going to work on them.

But if there is interest i will send a tarball that could really get someone 
started.  Btw, i have them building on windows too with only mingw, perl, and 
qt as dependancies.

Matt