Hi All, I'm excited about using v8::Extension instead of CppBoundClass but the JavaScript side of v8::Extension (via the |source| argument) seems a bit magical to me. Is there a document that explains the usage and capabilities of v8::Extension in greater detail? I have the following questions so far:
1. Can native functions be called directly by a renderer-loaded script, or must calls to them always be wrapped within |source|-defined JS objects/functions? 2. Are there any limits in scope or size to what can be done within a |source|-defined script? 3. Is there a way to specify native getter/setter functions for a property defined on the JS side? For instance, "myobject.foo = bar" would somehow call a natively defined "setFoo" function with the "bar" argument. If this isn't possible, are there any plans to support native properties directly? Thanks, Marshall On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Mike Belshe <[email protected]> wrote: > Yup. I am not saying we need to get rid of all of it immediately; just put > some comments in the header so that we don't use it *more*..... > Mike > > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Feng Qian <[email protected]> wrote: > >> CppBindingClass was started for test_shell if I remember correctly, >> and I think the functionality can be replaced by using NPAPI instead. >> I had an implementation of replacing CppBindingClass by NPAPI in >> test_shell (to avoid two implementations for JSC and V8), I don't >> remember where the code went. >> >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Mike Belshe <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I've felt this way for a while, and I figured I'd throw it out to see if >> we >> > all agree. >> > I'm hoping we can deprecate CppBindingClass. At this point, most >> extensions >> > are better served (I think!) via the v8::extension facility than the >> > CppBindingObject. If there are cases where this isn't true, I'd happily >> > work on v8::extension to make it so it could be. >> > If nobody objects, I hope we can agree to stop adding any new >> > CppBindingClass based bindings, and then over time get rid of >> > CppBindingObject altogether. >> > Anyone feel strongly in opposition? >> > >> > Mike >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
