On 01/06/10 22:18, Carlo Strata wrote:
I don't know if you already discuss about this question, but I want to
understand if native code plugins are useful or they mainly slow their
own diffusion/adoption in all platforms...
I know that OpenOffice.org needs java virtual machine to run his db
engine (hsqldb - 100% Java Database).
So why we didn't deploy all plugins in the .jar format (bytecode)?
I said .xpi too in the mail's object because Mozilla too has the same
"problem", hasn't it?
The java jit (just-in-time) compiler has today very good performance so
that if we will choose the jar way we could have no human feel with
performance decline.
In this new way, the diffusion of the extensions (plugins) for all
platforms would be *wider* and their update *faster* for user of all
platforms.
In case you did not know, the code in an .oxt extension can be written
in a variety of languages, including C++ (leading to native code with
all its problems you already pointed out) and Java (leading to
universally deployable extensions). The choice is up to the extension
author. Many extensions actually *are* written in Java.
-Stephan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
