On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 07:23:21PM -0400, Karl Dahlke wrote: > > I guess with tidy5 we'll be wanting to go for 3.6 as the next release > > I don't have strong feelings about this; whatever you and Chris think.
I'd go for 3.6 if given the choice, making 3.5.4 (the currently being worked on release) the last release in the 3.5 series. > > I'm also thinking we should get a stabilised tidy5 based html parser before > > we start playing with pulling the DOM into a separate process? > > Yes, and definitely yes. > Don't move all the chess pieces at once. > And it really will bring benefit: more web pages parsed properly, > all the nodes building js objects not just some of them, > all the html attributes becoming members in the corresponding js nodes > not just some of them, etc etc. Yes definitely. > > Next on my edbrowse todo list is to evaluate how ready the duktape js > > engine is > > A good trial is to > cp jseng-moz.cpp jseng-duk.c > and then modify the latter to use the duktape engine calls > and ideally we could just plug either one into edbrowse and they should > both work the same. > Good side by side comparisons. Yeah that's the plan. It'll also be a good test of how adaptable the protocol between edbrowse and edbrowse-js is in terms of passing around memory addresses etc. > I wanted to do the same with v8 but never got round to it, > and the v8 interface isn't as easy as I had hoped. > I never even got hello world to run > or even compile: js_hello_v8.cpp Indeed, I'm thinking that v8 really isn't an option here. Cheers, Adam.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Edbrowse-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.the-brannons.com/mailman/listinfo/edbrowse-dev
