On September 18, 2009, Petri Damstén wrote: > > > Currently making a weather applet is much harder in scripting languages > > > because you don't have access to the library. > > > > can't you build some QScript bindings for it? then the applet can request > > that add-on? > > Yes of course but I was thinking some common way that would not require > generating bindings for all available scritpengines.
there are a few ways to go about this: a) go around making bindings for multiple languages over and over. not realistic, imo b) create a generic interface to specific kinds of things that then each script engine maintainer can look after c) concentrate on the JS bindings and make those top tier and not worry too much about whether there are equal features in every single script engine. (c) is what i'd like to see us do. there are already differences between the script engines (obvious ones like google gadgets vs pythonoids; less obvious ones like python libs that aren't available in ruby). we really ought to be promoting JS as the preferred way to write plasmoids anyways and given that we have limited resources and no suitable CLR type thing realistically at our disposal, let's just concentrate on QSCript here. so.. what would it look like? i think most sensible would be a way to register families of widget types (weather, clock, etc). perhaps we can call them "widget foundations", since you build on top of them? each foundation would provide a factory for creating instances of an applet with some QScript hooks that can be exported into the runtime, perhaps as part of an object named "foundation"? -- 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 Development Frameworks
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
