need help on my javascript plasmoid

[Richard Dale]

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Aaron J. Seigo<aseigo at kde.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 23 July 2009, Richard Dale wrote:
>> Not specifically, but Arno Rehn is doing a GSOC project working on a
>> bindings generator that uses one of Roberto Raggi's parsers. He said
>> that the parser used for the QtScript bindings was about the oldest of
>> the lot (the one on gitorious - is that the same as the Amarok one?).
>> Arno is using the parser from KDevelop with KDE dependencies removed.
>> At the moment Roberto is actively maintaining the parser used in
>> QtCreator. So I think it would be a really good idea to consolidate
>> all these parsers, so that KDE only actually uses one of them. Then we
>> could use that one for QtScript bindings generation for the Qt and KDE
>> classes.
>
> hmmm... ok, good to know. my concern is that we just remain in limbo forever
> with the ecma script bindings. i really don't care if we have three generators
> (Or whatever) as long as we have bindings; but that's just me as a selfish
> prospective user of said bindings speaking ;)
>
> hopefully Arno Rehn's project will produce something we can use, then?
Well only Arno's expertise about the state of the various 'Raggi'
parsers and how to use them. The tool he is writing produces bindings
for the 'Smoke' libs used by Ruby, C# and Perl etc. and not QtScript.
If we want to produce bindings for the KDE classes for ECMA script, I
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'.

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. And for larger
more complex applets I certainly think JavaScript could start being a
bit of a pain compared with Python/Ruby. I'd like to hear some
feedback from the Amarok guys about what sort of programmer the
QtScript bindings were being used by, and how well they are coping
with the full Qt api.

-- Richard