>>  ok.  this is of course assuming that you _want_ javascript - at all.
>> you would not have implemented libdom if you didn't: there's no need.
>
> That was the whole point of libdom's existance :)

 :)

> http://wiki.netsurf-browser.org/Development_Plan#Road_to_JavaScript

 ah, thank you for pointing out this page, chris.  i was wondering if
it existed.  yay, good to see.

> Curiously any form of COM or langauge binding is missing from Road to
> Javascript.  I'm not sure if this means it hasn't been considered, but
> there does seem to be a gaping hole between "New layout engine" and
> "Javascript".

 .... yeah :)  yawning chasm is more like it.

 oh, m0n0: i was hunting around just now, to see if there's any
tutorials around.  i'm going to leave my computer installing
libseed-gtk3-0 and go to sleep soon, but i just wanted to point you at
this:

 http://blogs.gnome.org/johan/2008/06/01/introduction-to-gobject-introspection/

 notice the word "typelib"?  they've incorporated that concept into
g-i.   notice also that they quite literally took the code from XPCOM,
to do it?

 that's.... fascinating.  it means that g-i is inspired by XPCOM, and
XPCOM is inspired by COM.

 that means that, at a fundamental level, all those three technologies
achieve the same thing.  except that i know for a fact that the
mozilla team forgot to implement co-classes, which are utterly utterly
essential, and it means that g-i is just as fundamentally flawed as
XPCOM.

 l.

Reply via email to