I'm part of newcomers initiative and collaborate primarily on debugger feature on Builder. Nowadays I'm working to add debug expressions (or watches) to Builder but if I finish that I want to add a pdb plugin (add python debugger capabilities for Builder) I can't promise anything but I'm trying to get it working before end of April (for a workshop of Builder in Ubucon 2018 Gijón)
I know few to nothing about JavaScript debug (d8? gjs -d?) but seing pdb plugin could ease the pain for that, open issues for that on Builder could be a good start El mié., 4 abr. 2018 23:35, Emmanuele Bassi <eba...@gmail.com> escribió: > On 4 April 2018 at 19:39, Sriram Ramkrishna <s...@ramkrishna.me> wrote: > >> Some of you may be aware that we have started a documentation effort in >> order to give application developers a proper set of documentation for them >> to write applications. >> >> We need to optimize for one language rather than promoting all the >> languages. >> > > This was the conclusion of the 2013 DX hackfest: > > https://treitter.livejournal.com/14871.html > > and we all know how that turned out: > > - people (correctly or not) equated the "we chose to concentrate on > JavaScript" as "everyone should use JavaScript for GNOME" > - the messaging of "we chose to concentrate on JavaScript" pissed off > every other language community that had a sizeable presence in GNOME > (Python, most of all) > - the announcement was made without resourcing, in the *hope* somebody > would turn up > - we had to publicly backtrack on the messaging for the following 5 years > > But, hey: we got a good JavaScript experience, right? > > Well, not really. > > In the past, we have promoted javascript above all else. We haven't >> seen as much movement in javascript allegedly because the toolchain has >> not been as robust as the other languages. >> > > Mostly because "promoting JavaScript" from a documentation point of view > isn't related to toolchain improvements. > > The people that can write documentation are not the ones that are going to > hack on > > - the documentation platform > - the JS engine > - the plethora of tooling necessary to work and debug applications > > Even with the first item we've failed. We've had, what? 4 or 5 > documentation hackfests in the past 5 years, and all of them have a line > item about having better documentation platforms for our *C* API reference. > > I really don't want to take a dig at anybody at the DX and documentation > hackfests — they are all volunteers and they work *really* hard. The job is > daunting in the best case scenario of somebody actually paying for this > stuff; that we have documentation already is kind of a miracle. > > Since this conversation could easily get derailed, >> > > That's probably the understatement of the year — *but* I think we'd be > better served by actually going a bit deeper than just "let's evaluate a > single language for our platform". > > >> what I would like to focus on is using javascript as the default computer >> language for developing 3rd party apps on the GNOME platform. We would >> like to validate what the current state of javascript is for writing >> applications and whether we now have good support in flatpak, debugging >> toolchains (eg gjs and builder) and other factors we might have not >> considered but should be identified. >> >> > What does "validate" mean? You want to write an application? What kind of > an application? > > What does "good support in Flatpak" mean? > > What does "debugging toolchain" mean? > > More importantly: what are you planning to do if you find issues? > > Let's say that JavaScript fails to clear some arbitrary bar you defined — > and I'd really like to see how you define these bars to be cleared first — > what are the contingencies? Launch a D20 and choose another language? > > >> Any input in this regard would be well appreciated to drive good >> documentation to write applications for the GNOME platform. >> >> > While good documentation is a necessary stepping stone towards a decent > SDK and application development experience, it's nowhere near sufficient. > > You can have the best documentation in the world — but if you don't have > people working on the tooling and the actual integration between the > language and the platform, then you don't have anything that other people > can use. > > Ciao, > Emmanuele. > > -- > https://www.bassi.io > [@] ebassi [@gmail.com] > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
_______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
