DataEngine support for ScriptEngine

[Petri Damstén]

On Tuesday 22 January 2008 02:40:02 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> the engine should always support applets. or rather, it doesn't need to
> know.

This was one think that I forgot to ask. Does every ScriptEngine have to 
support all the types? (I think not, ScriptEngine could just find another 
plugin with the same language that supports needed type)

> in any case, the question then becomes, do we want DataEngine to do the
> same? i think the answer is "yes". exporting an actual DataEngine* from the
> ScriptEngine is likely to not work nicely with all possible language
> bindings.
>
> so the forwardable API from DataEngine includes:
>
> init
> sourceRequsted
> updateSource
>
> i think that's manageable, and we should consider doing this the same way
> in DataEngine as in Applet. what are your thoughts?

Yes runner, dataengine and applet should propably use same kind of api. What I 
like in returning actual DataEngine is that you don't have to duplicate every 
virtual function in ScriptEngine and it needs less modification to DataEngine 
class itself (keeps it simpler). Also I can't see what problems there could 
be with some language bindings?

> additionally, i'm wondering if it would make sense to have
> ScriptEngine::Applet, ScriptEngine::DataEngine and ScriptEngine::Runner
> inner classes, each one containing the API for each set of functionality.
> should make managing things a bit easier. i'll investigate this with Applet
> tonight....

Great, let's get back to this then.

Petri

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/panel-devel/attachments/20080122/2ccff15c/attachment.pgp