ant elder wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 8:40 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Simon Nash <[email protected]> wrote:
ant elder wrote:
I'm trying to understand what it is the real purpose of all the
Tuscany dojo modules:
tuscany-binding-atom-js-dojo
tuscany-binding-jsonrpc-js-dojo
tuscany-implementation-widget-runtime-dojo
tuscany-web-javascript-dojo
Can anyone help with some details?
...ant
These are used by the store-dojo sample. If you look at the store.html file
within that sample you will find some Javascript references to dojo things.
There are also a few differences in the Javascript code when compared with
the same code in the store sample. This might provide some clues :-)
Simon
These modules provide support for "Javascript Proxies" for
Implementation widget. They are based on Dojo Javascript Framework.
So they're only used with implementation.widget?
...ant
Yes, and some of they are optional depending on the binding you are
using in conjunction with implementation.widget.
Now that this thread has come up again it reminds me i'd asked about
them. if they're for implementation.widget could we have widget in the
module name to make that more clear? And now that we have the base +
extension approach and these don't drag in extra dependencies wouldn't
it be possible to just have them part of the widget runtime module so
there are no extra modules at all?
...ant
I'll toss in another suggestion. Instead of parallel sets of these
4 modules (one that uses dojo and one that doesn't), could the dojo and
non-dojo flavours of each module be combined, with runtime code in the
module to select which flavour should be used?
Simon
