I’m working on a project that needs lots of toolbars on screen at once, even though not all of them will be used at the same time. So, I’m modelling this ‘foldable’ dock widget after what I remember Photoshop panels used to be like.
It’s a work in progress, but would like to hear constructive suggestions.
https://blocks.programming.dev/0101100101/42c5d67f86c049baa3500aa38e439f8a
Thanks for your response.
Why is this? I have to admit that coming from other languages, it feels dirty, but is there a pythonic good reason for this? The class ‘belongs’ to the FoldableDockWidget class, so I figure it’s the best place to put it.
Arguing for modularity. Which isn’t likely in a gist (or a script), but is normal for a package.
By embedding the class, creates a limitation that prevents abstractions or other implementations of each component. Imagine every suggestion in this conversation thread is another variation with a separate implementation.
The widget class belongs to the FoldableDockWidget class until it doesn’t. Then a refactor is needed.
There should be four modules. The entrypoint (and cli options parsing), the application, the dockwidget, and the widget. Each should be testable by itself.
A widget is not a container. An application is not a container component (avoiding the word widget). Hardwiring a particular implementation of the Windowing Python wrapper is also unnecessary (PySide6). What about PySide2, pyQt5, pyQt6, and whatever else comes next?
As a side note
Why is there code in the process guard, besides
main()(or a async equivalent)? Only multiprocessing applications have code within the process guard. Code within the process guard is unreachable; can’t be imported. For example, testing just the cli option parsing.