On 23 Mrz., 16:40, Helge Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I suppose nobody questions that, its just that the goals are > different. Apparently Nikolaus just wants to build a browser with > great standards support (maybe thats why its named *Simple* WebKit?).
Exactly - we just want implement the standard and simple things so that they work. Not to please everybody, no portability to different platforms, not to handle workarounds on the server side for rare bugs of other browsers etc. > The only thing I'm a bit concerned about is how the two > implementations would live side by side if SimpleWebKit directly > implements WebKit classes instead of using a separate class hierarchy > which is then somehow mapped to the WebKit classes. > To bad we don't have namespaces in ObjC ;-) There is no problem to expect with that. Both implement the documented WebView and WebFrame API in two different frameworks. You can link to either one in your applications (there is IMHO no reason to have both in a single application). So, from API point of view they are interchangeable. Maybe, not from functionality. > Well, even if just a small JavaScript ObjC interpreter comes out of > this, it would be a very cool and useful thing! :-) Yes... it is already working well for simple expressions like (3+5)*8+" km". Parsing of the whole ECMAScript syntax is at approx. 90%. Evaluation lacks handling of variables and control structures. And, the builtin Script-Prototypes like Array, Boolean plus their methods wait for implementation. Nikolaus Schaller _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
