This way one could prototype very fast and deploy apps/extensions and test user interest: if it's high enough, could do a native extension to make it somewhat faster (but I doubt it would be much faster, or better said, with less latency).
Technically this will not be a significantly better solution than writing native extensions. Hosting Cloudeebus in the browser process will not work because security reasons (or need to include a security manager too which identifies and restricts apps). If we drop this, then 2 serializations need to be done anyway, one to/from D-Bus, and one to/from the JS shim. But indeed would result in somewhat less code to be written in certain/many extensions, and don't have to deal with mainloop integration issues since this one will be solved by the addition. So this would be very useful, ideal for prototyping, and even production in many cases, but cannot cover everything exclusively. However, when we also need C/C++ API's (i.e. there can be native apps and equivalent web apps too), it is better to use them directly in the native extensions, and some developers may just want to use D-Bus from their native extension code since they are used with it and goes fast, or just use their native libraries for a given service. Best regards, Zoltan On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2014-09-12 at 10:31 +0200, Jonatan Pålsson wrote: > >> On 12 September 2014 10:14, Patrick >> Ohly <[email protected]> wrote: >> Cloudeebus [1] is able to connect JavaScript apps to the D-Bus >> session >> or service bus. It can generate JavaProxy proxy objects >> automatically >> based on D-Bus introspection, pretty much like python-dbus >> does it. >> >> >> I think this sounds like a good approach. In the case of Media Manager >> it would have been even more beneficial if the introspection worked on >> the CommonAPI level. > > I agree, this would have some benefits. But it will be both more work > (someone needs to write a Franca code generator for JavaScript/Crosswalk > that works with CommonAPI services) and has a bigger impact on Tizen > (can we use and ship the Franca tools in Tizen), so I'd like to defer > the discussion of that to some other time. > > -- > Best Regards, Patrick Ohly > > The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although > I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way > represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak > on behalf of Intel on this matter. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
