Malaga Discussions II

[Michael Pyne]

On Sunday 28 August 2005 16:29, Sebastian Sauer wrote:
> > The discussion went a bit back and forth on the topics 'Do we support
> > only one or several languages?' and 'If one, what language will that
> > be?'. I was actually the strongest supporter of having a multi-language
> > strategy, but in the end we left it to the developers there representing
> > the actual kdebindings authors (Ian, Rich and Richard Dale) and they kind
> > of agreed that one excellent binding is more than enough work.
>
> Will this be a hard limit or is the 'one excellent binding' more something
> like 'KDE official supports only kjs-scripting, but if you like to
> experiment we've some xyz bindings up too'?

If Richard Dale is involved then I'm almost convinced that Ruby/Korundum will 
remain as an excellent binding.  I believe he's been working on it already in 
fact.

However, KJSEmbed is also excellent at this point, and I'm pretty sure it's 
actually being used for this purpose already.  And of course there's also QSA 
to consider.

Also this would be the solution with least impact, since KDE will be shipping 
KJS *anyways*, it makes sense to build on that instead of using a whole 
different script bindings layer.

> > During the discussion
> > on the numbers of languages to support it was already obvious that the
> > majority of developers wants kjs/qsa (which are said to differ only in
> > details so far) to be _that_ language.
>
> Quit funny cause the feedback I got last year from majority of users and
> developers is, that they would like to have python or <put your fav
> interpreter her> as preferred language instead of ecma like scripts.

Well in the end the difference between Python, Ruby, and JS is becoming more 
and more just syntactic sugar and standard library differences.  Although JS 
will be able to use Qt/KDE's libraries so I don't see that as a huge pitfall.

> As already sayed above that doesn't mean to maintain a bunch of equivalent
> solutions for all existing interpreterlanguages like done today, rather
> then providing a plugin-framework where somebody is able to put his own
> scripting-binding in and use it as first class citizen even if not official
> supported by the KDE-project.

It's a great idea but I guess we'll have to wait to see about the technical 
feasibility of it. ;)

Regards,
 - Michael Pyne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20050828/5d599542/attachment.sig>