On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 8:24:23 PM UTC-5, Mike Innes wrote:
>
> That's very cool. You should definitely package this up if you can. The 
> JS-on-top approach might actually make it easier to package up a Julia app, 
> at least in the short term. (Also, if you don't want to call julia.eval 
> every time, it should be easy to hook up the Julia instance to Juno and use 
> it as a repl).
>

julia.eval(<string>) is essentially what happens someone types string, and 
easy you say?  yes definitely!  I read that Atom has an app database and a 
package manager (apm), but low level nodejs stuff needs to interact more 
directly with Atom-shell and it might be difficult to use the Atom supplied 
extension framework.  I'll certainly follow up.
 

>
> The Blink.jl model turns out to work quite well for us – since it's 
> basically a thin layer over a Julia server + browser window, it should be 
> easy to serve Blink.jl apps both locally and over the internet, which will 
> open up some interesting possibilities. It does hurt ease-of-use a little 
> though, so I'd be happy to see alternative approaches crop up.
>

Cool!  I read the src and it seems to boil down to the @js macro which 
printlns a JSON object over a socket, would it be as simple as instead 
sending to some sort of IO buffer?
 
-Jeff

Reply via email to