On 29 April 2014 15:17, Koehne Kai <[email protected]> wrote:
> On to the topic: QML is what the QML parser accepts (that is, JSON like 
> declarative syntax + JavaScript in certain places). No, there's no standard 
> document for it (in case that's what you're after), but it has a well-defined 
> grammar etc. Christian Kamm AFAIR planned a long time ago to add the grammar 
> to the documentation, but I think that never was finished.
>
> And, as always, the documentation can be improved ;)
>
> The discussion so far was whether it makes sense to give the 'declarative' 
> part alone a separate name (something we haven't done so far). I personally 
> agree with Alan that it doesn't make much sense as long as the two parts are 
> technically and practically inseparable. But I'm personally all for an 
> experiment to come up with a more strict, declarative QML subset.

*.qmltypes and *.qbs files already use a "declarative-only" dialect, right?

I think giving the declarative part of the language an identity/name
its own can help users better envisage the line between the
declarative bits and the imperative bits. (Disclaimer: I'm no
psychologist; this is a gut feeling).

It will also resolve, once and for all, any lingering confusions and
disagreements on what we mean by "QML". (Case study: See the comments
at https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,84256)


Regards,
Sze-Howe
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to