Willy J. Hoogstraten wrote:
>I guess that instead of adding new functions to Arachne, it should be better
>to make a stable release out of the current version (look at Insight, it is
>terrible!).
I find it very stable as it is :)
>Some _BIG_ companies already proved that releasing new functions without
>solving old bugs, lead to big monsters without much reliability.
>If Java Support will be as buggy as Arachne is right now, I guess we can
>better search for another browser (or write one ourselves under GPL).
Noone has talked about *Java* support. Please can we just once and for all
get the facts clear on this matter.
Java and Javascript has the four following things in common:
1. The first letter in the name is a "J"
2. The second letter in the name is an "a"
3. The third letter in the name is a "v"
4. The fourth letter in the name is an "a"
And that's it. (Ok, they are both object oriented - but C++ and Java has
more in common for example).
Java will probably not be introduced (and IMHO that's the best choice).
JavaScript on the other hand isn't that difficult to add - except that it's
very large (perhaps a subset can be supported?) and that it makes pages
dynamic.
These are the most common used JS functions:
document.open()
document.writeln()
window.status()
on*()
And to test what JS version is available (most typically tested by looking
for browser or browser version), if/else statments and time handling.
Of course I've probably left some out - but Arachne doesn't need all the
weird functions that are possible (how many use a cos() function on a page
anyway - I've only seen one and that was for benchmarking on the browser).
//Bernie
http://bernie.arachne.cz/ DOS programs, Star Wars ...
