Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Monday 03 November 2008, Richard Dale wrote: >> Well I think what Simon and myself are doing is different from what the >> GoogleGadgets and Edje implementors were doing. >> >> For better or worse we don't want to design a new api because we think the >> C++ api is perfectly fine when translated method for method, and class for >> class, to other more dynamic languages. > > that's fine, but it doesn't help me understand the lack of feedback on these > things or the hesitance to just add the methods needed to, e.g., > DataEngineScript as they are found.
The hesitance to just go adding methods is, for me, because I don't really understand the goals of the scripting APIs, and I don't want to just go in and turn it upside-down. As Richard said, the work which the Google Gadgets and Edje people are doing, i.e. integrating an alien API which knows nothing about Qt + KDE, is very different than the situation with Python and Ruby. Here we just want to use a different language, but not a different API. > what fascinated me was that the people working on mating it with 3rd party > APIs from outside of KDE were better at communicating their pain points. not > sure the cause of that, but it's an interesting result. Well, Richard has got already got almost all of the pain points sorted out, and I'm following his lead for the most part. :) I'll try to have a closer look at applet.h, dataengine.h, runnercontext.h this week and compare them with their scriptengine counter parts. cheers, -- Simon Edwards | KDE-NL, Guidance tools, Guarddog Firewall [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.simonzone.com/software/ Nijmegen, The Netherlands | "ZooTV? You made the right choice." _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
