[Qgis-developer] SIP API Update merged. Attention plugin authors

[Victor Olaya]

I find that same behaviour that Matthias confirms.

I guess it should be fixed, since it forces developers to add extra
code to handle that case, and it can be very confusing (all other
Qvariants are removed, except in this case...)

Hopefully it will be easy to fix.

Thanks in advance!
Victor

2013/6/9 Nathan Woodrow <madmanwoo at gmail.com>:
> Ok I'll check it out and see if it can be converted.
>
> -- Nathan
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Matthias Kuhn <matthias.kuhn at gmx.ch>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Son 09 Jun 2013 16:02:57 CEST, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
>> > Victor,
>> >
>> > Which code is returning a QVariant null?
>>
>> feat['myAttribute']
>> returns QPyNullVariant for all features which have a NULL value in the
>> field myAttribute.
>>
>> None would work for me as well. But I'm not sure, why PyQt introduced
>> this new type. Maybe there is a reason?
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>> >
>> > - Nathan
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Victor Olaya <volayaf at gmail.com
>> > <mailto:volayaf at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     I am checking the SEXTANTE adaptation to the new SIP API, and
>> >     everything is fine. The only "strange" thing that I found is how
>> > null
>> >     values are handled when they appear in a vector layer field. It
>> > seems
>> >     that, in that case, a QVariant is still returned (particularly a
>> >     QPyNullVariant object). Wouldn't it be better to return a Python
>> > None
>> >     instead, so in all cases Python values are returned?
>> >
>> >     Cheers
>> >
>> >     2013/6/9 Richard Duivenvoorde <rdmailings at duif.net
>> >     <mailto:rdmailings at duif.net>>:
>> >     > On 09-06-13 10:47, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
>> >     >>
>> >     >> Technically this can be done for smaller plugins like Borys said.
>> >     >>   Something like:
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >     > I think only for VERY small plugins. In the (not so very big
>> >     plugins) I do
>> >     > it was already getting messy.
>> >     >
>> >     > And by the why, a big thank you for all the great work and
>> >     decisions being
>> >     > done lately! I really think 2.0 will be great \o/
>> >     >
>> >     > Richard
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >     > _______________________________________________
>> >     > Qgis-developer mailing list
>> >     > Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> >     <mailto:Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >     > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> >     _______________________________________________
>> >     Qgis-developer mailing list
>> >     Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> > <mailto:Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org>
>> >     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Qgis-developer mailing list
>> > Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>>
>