On Friday 24 July 2009, Richard Dale wrote: > think upgrading the parser would be the best first step. I don't mind > helping if it is something that would be popular, as opposed to 'just > for completeness'.
i'd like to see JavaScript be _the_ recommended method for writing plasmoids. it's nice to have Python and Ruby as options, but JavaScript really ought to be the preferred solution (including for us on the plasma team). > But I wonder if the current QtScript bindings with some enhancements > like being able to use a HTTP download Plasma service and so on, would > be good enough. By the time you have dependencies on large KDE > bindings libs then maybe the advantage of QtScript over Ruby and > Python of it always being installed would be negated. well, plasma already relies on kdelibs, obviously, so sucking in kdelibs isn't an issue. the benefits of JavaScript are: * way more people in this world know ECMA Script (for better or worse) * it has zero extra dependencies over what Plasma already has (qt, kdelibs) * it's realistic to consider sandboxing ECMA Script -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Software
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
