dependencies on KJS/KHTML in kdelibs and kdebase-runtime

Chani chanika at
Sat Sep 25 12:23:14 BST 2010

On September 24, 2010 23:20:23 Maksim Orlovich wrote:
> Nah, the performance part is likely the accurate one, unless the bloat
> of QtScript manages to hide JSC's excellent performance. Which it
> actually might.
> On 9/24/10, Albert Astals Cid <aacid at> wrote:
> > A Divendres, 24 de setembre de 2010, Maksim Orlovich va escriure:
> >> > To put it plainly, if I'm the maintainer of a piece of code (in
> >> > kdelibs, kdebase, wherever) that uses KJS, and someone offers me to
> >> > port that code
> >> > to QtScript himself (stating as reasons wider availability, higher
> >> > performance, and shorter code), is there a reason to refuse that?
> >> 
> >> How about when the truthfulness of most of these claims is dubious?
> > 
> > Then it's when we do some benchmarking?

the "shorter code" part is.. an understatement. I saw a bit of it. there are 
huge swaths of code that would be just *gone* after switching to qtscript.

wider availablility? well, given that kde depends on qt, kjs cannot have wider 
availability than qscript. as best they'd be equal - but as aaron explained, 
on mobile there's no room for multiple implementations of things. therefore qt 
has wider availability.

and... you say that higher performance is likely accurate.

so, I'm not seeing anything dubious here. o.0

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list