Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine
Okay, thanks. This could have been written more clear on the webpage From: Jean-Michaël Celerier [mailto:jeanmichael.celer...@gmail.com] Sent: Montag, 29. Jänner 2018 19:57 To: Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com> Cc: Konstantin Tokarev <annu...@yandex.ru>; interest@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine > At this page there is written next to Qt Web Engine (under LGPL only). > Therefore I concluded that the rest is GPL. If I am not mistaken it means instead that the rest is LGPL + commercial, which is Qt's "normal" license. Best, Jean-Michaël On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 3:27 PM, Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com<mailto:stefan.wal...@lisec.com>> wrote: Thanks, because the web-page of Qt is confusing. At this page there is written next to Qt Web Engine (under LGPL only). Therefore I concluded that the rest is GPL. -Original Message- From: Konstantin Tokarev [mailto:annu...@yandex.ru<mailto:annu...@yandex.ru>] Sent: Montag, 29. Jänner 2018 18:20 To: Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com<mailto:stefan.wal...@lisec.com>>; interest@qt-project.org<mailto:interest@qt-project.org> Subject: Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine 29.01.2018, 17:08, "Walter Stefan" <stefan.wal...@lisec.com<mailto:stefan.wal...@lisec.com>>: > Thanks for the quick response. > > Is there a web-link that supports this, or where can I seen the licenses to > the Qt modules? https://webkit.org/licensing-webkit/ http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtwebkit.git/tree/LICENSE.LGPLv21 > > Best Regards, > Stefan > > -Original Message- > From: Konstantin Tokarev [mailto:annu...@yandex.ru<mailto:annu...@yandex.ru>] > Sent: Montag, 29. Jänner 2018 18:05 > To: Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com<mailto:stefan.wal...@lisec.com>>; > interest@qt-project.org<mailto:interest@qt-project.org> > Subject: Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine > > 29.01.2018, 16:58, "Walter Stefan" > <stefan.wal...@lisec.com<mailto:stefan.wal...@lisec.com>>: >> Hi, >> >> I’ve done some research about QWebView and QWebEngine and came to the >> following conclusion: >> >> QWebView is under GPL and uses internally WebKit. > > Incorrect. QtWebKit code is LGPL+BSD. > >> QWebEngine is under LGPL and uses internally Chromium. >> >> Please let me know if this is correct, because I don’t want to disclose my >> source and that would mean I have to use QWebEngine. >> >> Is there beside the license other limitations to be aware of? >> >> Thanks and Regards, >> >> Stefan >> , >> >> ___ >> Interest mailing list >> Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org> >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > -- > Regards, > Konstantin -- Regards, Konstantin ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine
Thanks, because the web-page of Qt is confusing. At this page there is written next to Qt Web Engine (under LGPL only). Therefore I concluded that the rest is GPL. -Original Message- From: Konstantin Tokarev [mailto:annu...@yandex.ru] Sent: Montag, 29. Jänner 2018 18:20 To: Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com>; interest@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine 29.01.2018, 17:08, "Walter Stefan" <stefan.wal...@lisec.com>: > Thanks for the quick response. > > Is there a web-link that supports this, or where can I seen the licenses to > the Qt modules? https://webkit.org/licensing-webkit/ http://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtwebkit.git/tree/LICENSE.LGPLv21 > > Best Regards, > Stefan > > -Original Message- > From: Konstantin Tokarev [mailto:annu...@yandex.ru] > Sent: Montag, 29. Jänner 2018 18:05 > To: Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com>; interest@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine > > 29.01.2018, 16:58, "Walter Stefan" <stefan.wal...@lisec.com>: >> Hi, >> >> I’ve done some research about QWebView and QWebEngine and came to the >> following conclusion: >> >> QWebView is under GPL and uses internally WebKit. > > Incorrect. QtWebKit code is LGPL+BSD. > >> QWebEngine is under LGPL and uses internally Chromium. >> >> Please let me know if this is correct, because I don’t want to disclose my >> source and that would mean I have to use QWebEngine. >> >> Is there beside the license other limitations to be aware of? >> >> Thanks and Regards, >> >> Stefan >> , >> >> ___ >> Interest mailing list >> Interest@qt-project.org >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > > -- > Regards, > Konstantin -- Regards, Konstantin ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine
Thanks for the quick response. Is there a web-link that supports this, or where can I seen the licenses to the Qt modules? Best Regards, Stefan -Original Message- From: Konstantin Tokarev [mailto:annu...@yandex.ru] Sent: Montag, 29. Jänner 2018 18:05 To: Walter Stefan <stefan.wal...@lisec.com>; interest@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Interest] QWebView vs. QWebEngine 29.01.2018, 16:58, "Walter Stefan" <stefan.wal...@lisec.com>: > Hi, > > I’ve done some research about QWebView and QWebEngine and came to the > following conclusion: > > QWebView is under GPL and uses internally WebKit. Incorrect. QtWebKit code is LGPL+BSD. > > QWebEngine is under LGPL and uses internally Chromium. > > Please let me know if this is correct, because I don’t want to disclose my > source and that would mean I have to use QWebEngine. > > Is there beside the license other limitations to be aware of? > > Thanks and Regards, > > Stefan > , > > ___ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest -- Regards, Konstantin ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
[Interest] QJSEngine replacement for QScriptEngine misses newFunction
Hi,
I am looking into migrating my code to QJSEngine, because of the deprecation of
the QScriptEngine (QtScript). As we have used the functionality of newFunction
very extensive and all related scripts are depending on this, the newFunction
in QJSEngine is for us mandatory or something that creates and equivalent
result.
How do I currently map a native C++ class member function to the engine:
QScriptValue func_sqrt = m_engine->newFunction(sqrt, liEngine);
m_engine->globalObject().setProperty("sqrt", func_sqrt, QScriptValue::ReadOnly
| QScriptValue::Undeletable);
This is an example of a native function:
QScriptValue ScriptModuleMath::sqrt(QScriptContext *context, QScriptEngine
*engine, void *arg)
{
Q_UNUSED(engine)
Q_UNUSED(arg)
if (context->argumentCount()!=1)
{
return context->throwError( QScriptContext::SyntaxError, "sqrt(...):
illegal number of arguments.");
} else if (!context->argument(0).isNumber())
{
return context->throwError( QScriptContext::SyntaxError, "sqrt(...):
argument 1 is not a number.");
}
return qSqrt(context->argument(0).toNumber());
}
And in this way. I can use it then in the script:
value = sqrt(4);
I actually don't want to map a whole QObject, because that would require a call
like this:
value = MyMath.sqrt(4);
Is there any way to achive in QJSEngine the same result as I do within the
QScriptEngine?
Best Regards,
Stefan
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] QJSEngine replacement for QScriptEngine misses newFunction
Thanks Stephen!
I found a solution, which is very similar to your approach.
QJSValue myExt = m_engine->newQObject(new ScriptModuleMath());
// mount the whole class ScriptModule to the engine --> Math.sqrt(4)
m_engine->globalObject().setProperty("Math", myExt);
// mount only the sqrt function to the engine --> sqrt(4)
m_engine->globalObject().setProperty("sqrt", myExt.property("sqrt"));
the first mount allows me now to access the whole object and of course my
sqrt() method.
i.e. Math.sqrt(4);
the second mount allows me to directly access the sqrt() method without the
instance.
i.e. sqrt(4);
Thanks for your suggestion.
Best Regards,
Stefan
-Original Message-
From: Interest [mailto:interest-bounces+stefan.walter=lisec@qt-project.org]
On Behalf Of Stephen Bryant
Sent: Dienstag, 23. Februar 2016 15:12
To: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] QJSEngine replacement for QScriptEngine misses
newFunction
Hi Stefan,
On Tuesday 23 February 2016 05:34:03 Walter Stefan wrote:
[...]
>
> And in this way. I can use it then in the script:
> value = sqrt(4);
>
> I actually don't want to map a whole QObject, because that would
> require a call like this: value = MyMath.sqrt(4);
>
> Is there any way to achive in QJSEngine the same result as I do within
> the QScriptEngine?
Is far as I know, the only way is to do the thing you don't want to: map the
whole QObject. You can, however, add a JS function reference inside the engine
so you can call the function without the object name.
QJSEngine engine;
engine.globalObject().setProperty(
"MyMath",
engine.newQObject( new ScriptModuleMath( ) ) ); engine.evaluate( "var
sqrt=MyMath.sqrt;" ); // repeat for other functions
This will now work in JS: value = sqrt(4);
You'll presumably be aware that all public slots of MyMath will automatically
be available as JS functions. That makes things a little easier.
It seems that you also need a QObject instance, event if you only want to
expose static methods.
BTW: your C++ native function can use this signature: double sqrt(double);
You'll get NaN if somebody calls it with a non-number. The return value is
also automatically converted as there is a QJSValue constructor that takes a
double.
There's no direct equivalent of read-only/undeletable, unfortunately. I'm
missing that too. The closest you can get is that your MyMath functions can't
be altered from JS, and you can also make a read-only Q_PROPERTY.
However, there is nothing stopping somebody from reassigning properties of the
global object - so your 'sqrt' function and 'MyMath' object could be replaced.
This may be a security concern, depending on what you're doing.
Best regards,
Steve
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
[Interest] QJSEngine replacement for QScriptEngine misses newFunction
Hi,
I am looking into migrating my code to QJSEngine, because of the deprecation of
the QScriptEngine (QtScript). As we have used the functionality of newFunction
very extensive and all related scripts are depending on this, the newFunction
in QJSEngine is for us mandatory or something that creates and equivalent
result.
How do I currently map a native C++ class member function to the engine:
QScriptValue func_sqrt = m_engine->newFunction(sqrt, liEngine);
m_engine->globalObject().setProperty("sqrt", func_sqrt, QScriptValue::ReadOnly
| QScriptValue::Undeletable);
This is an example of a native function:
QScriptValue ScriptModuleMath::sqrt(QScriptContext *context, QScriptEngine
*engine, void *arg)
{
Q_UNUSED(engine)
Q_UNUSED(arg)
if (context->argumentCount()!=1)
{
return context->throwError( QScriptContext::SyntaxError, "sqrt(...):
illegal number of arguments.");
} else if (!context->argument(0).isNumber())
{
return context->throwError( QScriptContext::SyntaxError, "sqrt(...):
argument 1 is not a number.");
}
return qSqrt(context->argument(0).toNumber());
}
And in this way. I can use it then in the script:
value = sqrt(4);
I actually don't want to map a whole QObject, because that would require a call
like this:
value = MyMath.sqrt(4);
Is there any way to achive in QJSEngine the same result as I do within the
QScriptEngine?
Best Regards,
Stefan
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
