From: Oliver B. <oli...@jk...> - 2011-03-09 06:29:58
|
Am 09.03.2011 06:38, schrieb Oliver Buchtala: > Am 09.03.2011 02:02, schrieb Matthias: >> Am 07.03.2011, 15:16 Uhr, schrieb Oliver Buchtala<oli...@jk...>: >> >>> Hi Matthias, >>> >>> thank you for this interesting discussion. >>> I understand your point of view and think it is also reasonable :) >>> Obviously, there is not yet a solution available that fulfills all of >>> our needs. >>> And thus, swig modules for both approaches are interesting. >>> >>> I think there is a certain amount of code that could be used between >>> both modules - or js modules in general. >>> Generally we could profit from sharing conceptual knowledge about >>> creating a swig module. >>> Furthermore, there is need for techniques that map OOP concepts to >>> javascript's prototyping approach. >>> Due to the same target language there will be a lot of common things to >>> realize typmappings for standard c++ types etc. >>> >>> What do you think about addressing both modules together? >>> Do have experience in swig development? >>> >>> So, if you are interested - for me, i am! >> Hey Oliver, >> >> sorry for taking a bit longer to reply. >> >> I've talked with the main contributor of the firebreath project and there >> seems to be a promising alternative. It seems possible to pass dom >> elements/generic javascript objects from the browser to V8 via small >> bridge. This works by implementing a type in V8 which just works upon the >> C++ object retrieved from the browser's javascript engine. The author of >> the firebreath project said he had this already working to couple two >> browsers and their javascript engines together. >> >> So maybe we can limit ourselves to a V8 wrapper. A wrapper to all browsers >> (via a plugin) can then be realized by a small hand-written bridge written >> by me (and maybe the author of the firebreath project who expressed >> interest in this project). >> >> This way we can both get what we want with a single target :) >> >> Do you have any kind of instant messenger or an irc channel you regularly >> visit? Then we can work out more details via a more direct communication. >> >> -Matthias >> > Hi Matthias! > > This is great news! A firebreath work on that would establish a nice > clean solution and we would not get hands extra dirty. Also, V8 will > definitely be more willing to integrate adaptions in their repo for > firebreath than for a small new-comer project - and no monkey patching > no more :) > > There is currently no irc channel I visit on a regular basis. As we > develop for swig we could use its channel: #swig-gsoc on irc.freenode.net? > > Two things remaining: we should ask firebreath to do the same with JSC > - then we also cover the regular webkit based browsers. Especially I > am interested in qt-webkit to be able to integrate with a qt app. The > second, of course this solution does not cover the pure standalone > thing. But, I can live with that for now as personally I am interested > in an integrated solution. > > I think, this is indeed a good way to go. > > Bye, > Oliver After reading your mail again (omg - should not work sooo early) I know that I did not understand all of it. Is it so, that we would write a V8 swig target that generates modules that can be bridged to NPAPI and thus be available for all browsers? (Then my second comment above is obsolete...) Bye, Oliver |