Subject | Re: [Firebird-Architect] java script in the engine |
---|---|
Author | marius popa |
Post date | 2008-09-03T19:35:34Z |
On 9/3/08, Jim Starkey <jstarkey@...> wrote:
and usualy anyone can learn javascript , is an language present in all browsers
usually is easier to learn an scripting language than an traditional
one (java, c++)
this is why php/ruby/python are used everywhere in web2.0 world
http://www.cio.com/article/446829/PHP_JavaScript_Ruby_Perl_Python_and_Tcl_Today_The_State_of_the_Scripting_Universe?contentId=446829&slug=&
maybe is better to help the writing of safe extensions and classes in
javascript
without precompiling them
i think it's an model validated by firefox , write an engine and add
javascript/xul extension mechanism so is a little hard now to live
without them
in my case firebug, delicious , livehttp headers ...
but also any other browser can add scripting languages to it
another example is epiphany with python based extensions
so the base rule if you have an engine is better to have an scripting
extension language and is better to be easy to learn
the jump from html to javacript or is easy
any modern browser has an javascript compiler included , in fact i use
it right now from the gmail interface ...
now put me to compile and set the java package classes and paths and
variables ...
and god knows if the compiler error trace is longer than my LCD screen
even sun/microsoft are moving towards dynamic languages
--
developer flamerobin.org
> marius popa wrote:majority of the applications are written for web
>> I know about java script that can run on java machine so it might run
>> in firebird too (in the close future)
>> http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/
>>
>> but the new kid on the block is v8 from google but it needs to be
>> integrated
>>
>> http://code.google.com/apis/v8/intro.html
>>
>> seems to be quite fast at java script with the v8 engine
>> http://blog.chromium.org/2008/09/google-chromes-need-for-speed_02.html
>>
>>
> Doable, yes. But why? The main claim to Javascript is its ability to
> interact with the document object model (DOM) of a browser which, of
> course, neither exists nor has a counter part in the server. It is
> cheap to parse and interpret and runs in a sandbox, all good things for
> an embedded language. So my question is "why Javascript?" What
> problems does it address/solve?
>
and usualy anyone can learn javascript , is an language present in all browsers
usually is easier to learn an scripting language than an traditional
one (java, c++)
this is why php/ruby/python are used everywhere in web2.0 world
http://www.cio.com/article/446829/PHP_JavaScript_Ruby_Perl_Python_and_Tcl_Today_The_State_of_the_Scripting_Universe?contentId=446829&slug=&
maybe is better to help the writing of safe extensions and classes in
javascript
without precompiling them
i think it's an model validated by firefox , write an engine and add
javascript/xul extension mechanism so is a little hard now to live
without them
in my case firebug, delicious , livehttp headers ...
but also any other browser can add scripting languages to it
another example is epiphany with python based extensions
so the base rule if you have an engine is better to have an scripting
extension language and is better to be easy to learn
the jump from html to javacript or is easy
any modern browser has an javascript compiler included , in fact i use
it right now from the gmail interface ...
now put me to compile and set the java package classes and paths and
variables ...
and god knows if the compiler error trace is longer than my LCD screen
even sun/microsoft are moving towards dynamic languages
--
developer flamerobin.org