Several webpages say that QTreeWidgetItem
can be deleted by deleting or QTreeWidget.clear
ing. But my code sample below doesn\'t seem to do so. Am I doi
As an epilogue to Avaris' excellent answer, let's flog an even more general-purpose approach applicable to all widgets and widget items (rather than merely top-level tree widget items). Is this supposed Shangri-La too good to be true?
To quoth the Mario: "Waaaa! Let's-a-go!"
Specifically, if your project leverages:
PySide2, import the shiboken2
module and pass each tree widget item to be deleted to the shiboken2.delete()
function ala:
# Well, isn't that nice. Thanks, Qt Company.
from PySide2 import shiboken2
# Add this item to this tree.
tree = QTreeWidget()
item = TreeWidgetItemChild()
tree.addTopLevelItem(item)
# Remove this item from this tree. We're done here, folks.
shiboken2.delete(item)
PyQt5, import the sip
module and pass each tree widget item to be deleted to the sip.delete()
function ala:
# Well, isn't that not-quite-so-nice. You are now required to import any
# arbitrary PyQt5 submodule *BEFORE* importing "sip". Hidden side effects are
# shameful, of course, but we don't make the rules. We only enforce them. For
# detailed discussion, see:
#
# http://pyqt.sourceforge.net/Docs/PyQt5/incompatibilities.html#pyqt-v5-11
#
# If your project requires PyQt5 >= 5.11, the following compatibility hack may
# be safely reduced to the following one-liner:
#
# from PyQt5 import sip
from PyQt5 import QtCore
import sip
# Add this item to this tree.
tree = QTreeWidget()
item = TreeWidgetItemChild()
tree.addTopLevelItem(item)
# Remove this item from this tree.
sip.delete(item)
Yes, this behaves as expected under all platforms and (PyQt5|PySide2) releases. The Python-specific sip.delete()
and shiboken2.delete()
methods are high-level wrappers around the underlying C++ delete
operator – and operate exactly identically. In the case of QTreeWidgetItem
instances, this reproduces the C++ behaviour of immediately removing the passed item from its parent tree.
Yes, it is both glorious and sketchy. Thanks to alexisdm's relevant answer elsewhere for the motivational impetus behind this overwrought answer. Glory be to alexisdm.