Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-25 Thread Kuba Ober
On Nov 15, 2013, at 4:58 PM, Richard Moore wrote: > The idea that QML deprecates ui files is frankly utter rubbish. UI > files offer many advantages over QML - decent widgets, keyboard > navigation, stability, faster coding for the common case in non-mobile > applications (to name just a few of

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-19 Thread Alan Alpert
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:17 AM, André Pönitz wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 03:07:41PM -0800, Alan Alpert wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Richard Moore wrote: >> > >> > The idea that QML deprecates ui files is frankly utter rubbish. UI >> > files offer many advantages over QML - de

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-19 Thread André Pönitz
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 03:07:41PM -0800, Alan Alpert wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Richard Moore wrote: > > > > The idea that QML deprecates ui files is frankly utter rubbish. UI > > files offer many advantages over QML - decent widgets, keyboard > > navigation, stability, faster codi

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-18 Thread Knoll Lars
On 16.11.13 00:26, "Alan Alpert" <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Kevin Krammer >wrote: >> [...] >>> Quoting your latest post: >>> > I can understand that you'd like to have the same script engine >>>evaluate >>> > both types of script, but since the decision was to

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Alan Alpert
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Kevin Krammer wrote: > [...] >> Quoting your latest post: >> > I can understand that you'd like to have the same script engine evaluate >> > both types of script, but since the decision was to make an optimized >> > version for QML, you can either try to shoehorn y

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Alan Alpert
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Richard Moore wrote: > On 15 November 2013 19:51, Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin Krammer >> wrote: >>> On Thursday, 2013-11-14, 21:20:25, Topi Mäenpää wrote: >>> >>> I also wouldn't consider widgets to be depre

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Kevin Krammer
On Friday, 2013-11-15, 23:04:40, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > > That could have been a miscommunication. What they probably meant was that > > the standard QtQuick module would not have a QML type for QScriptEngine. > I didn't need to be told this. I mean, who would really suggest having a > JavaScript en

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Richard Moore
On 15 November 2013 19:51, Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin Krammer wrote: >> On Thursday, 2013-11-14, 21:20:25, Topi Mäenpää wrote: >> >> I also wouldn't consider widgets to be deprecated, at least not yet. And >> nicely use QML with widgets as th

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Alan Alpert
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > [...] > In Qt4, widgets were still the main UI technology. Nowadays, widgets are > "deprecated". (I'm putting quotes due to the comments to my last post, > but it is really not hard to see where the development is heading.) > Prior to QML apps

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Topi Mäenpää
> That could have been a miscommunication. What they probably meant was that the > standard QtQuick module would not have a QML type for QScriptEngine. I didn't need to be told this. I mean, who would really suggest having a JavaScript engine inside a JavaScript engine? I could see the reason if

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Kevin Krammer
On Friday, 2013-11-15, 21:51:37, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > > I think the existence of JavaScript context in QML should be considered a > > feature of QML, not of Qt or the application itself. > > Sure, as far as the Qt application is not a QML application. If you run > the app with qmlscene, the "Qt a

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Kevin Krammer
On Friday, 2013-11-15, 11:51:43, Alan Alpert wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin Krammer wrote: > > On Thursday, 2013-11-14, 21:20:25, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > >> I considered the options carefully before switching to Qt5. I talked to > >> Digia engineers and they told me the same you a

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Alan Alpert
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: >> I think the existence of JavaScript context in QML should be considered a >> feature of QML, not of Qt or the application itself. > > Sure, as far as the Qt application is not a QML application. If you run > the app with qmlscene, the "Qt ap

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Alan Alpert
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Kevin Krammer wrote: > On Thursday, 2013-11-14, 21:20:25, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > >> > But that's a long term plan, v4vm isn't even released yet (new in 5.2 >> > remember) and there's still tons of work to do. Until v4vm is ready to >> > take over from QtScript, whic

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Topi Mäenpää
> I think the existence of JavaScript context in QML should be considered a > feature of QML, not of Qt or the application itself. Sure, as far as the Qt application is not a QML application. If you run the app with qmlscene, the "Qt application" is a pure QML application. > There is a module sp

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Kevin Krammer
On Thursday, 2013-11-14, 21:20:25, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > > But that's a long term plan, v4vm isn't even released yet (new in 5.2 > > remember) and there's still tons of work to do. Until v4vm is ready to > > take over from QtScript, which will still be a while, I believe the > > recommendation is

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Milian Wolff
On Thursday 14 November 2013 21:20:25 Topi Mäenpää wrote: > Qt is heading to a JavaScript-based future. Widgets are deprecated and > replaced by QML. This is not true, Widgets are _not_ deprecated. It's true that more and more people adapt QML for UI designing, but you are free to choose. htt

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-15 Thread Kevin Krammer
On Monday, 2013-11-11, 10:38:28, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > I've been using Qt's JavaScript engines to provide a scripting interface > to Into about ever since QScriptEngine was introduced. It provided > fairly good extension interfaces and I was able to implement almost > everything I wanted using the

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Alan Alpert
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: >> Pick the wrong interface classes, like QtScript did, and you suffer in >> the long term. That's why we aren't committing to anything more than >> the overly basic QJSEngine API just yet. > > > This is true for all new features. Fearing mista

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Topi Mäenpää
> Pick the wrong interface classes, like QtScript did, and you suffer in > the long term. That's why we aren't committing to anything more than > the overly basic QJSEngine API just yet. This is true for all new features. Fearing mistakes however means no innovation and no progress. But of course

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Alan Alpert
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On quinta-feira, 14 de novembro de 2013 17:25:08, Tony Van Eerd wrote: >> > But that's a long term plan, v4vm isn't even released yet (new in 5.2 >> > remember) and there's still tons of work to do. Until v4vm is ready to >> > take over fro

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Thiago Macieira
On quinta-feira, 14 de novembro de 2013 17:25:08, Tony Van Eerd wrote: > > But that's a long term plan, v4vm isn't even released yet (new in 5.2 > > remember) and there's still tons of work to do. Until v4vm is ready to > > take over from QtScript, which will still be a while, I believe the > > rec

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Tony Van Eerd
> > But that's a long term plan, v4vm isn't even released yet (new in 5.2 > remember) and there's still tons of work to do. Until v4vm is ready to > take over from QtScript, which will still be a while, I believe the > recommendation is to keep using QtScript. It's deprecated and "done" > because

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Alan Alpert
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > On 11/14/2013 04:43 PM, Robin Burchell wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Topi Mäenpää >> wrote: >>> Or rather could, if the interface wasn't a moving target. >> >> If an interface is a moving target, that means that trying to promis

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Topi Mäenpää
On 11/14/2013 04:43 PM, Robin Burchell wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Topi Mäenpää > wrote: >> Or rather could, if the interface wasn't a moving target. > > If an interface is a moving target, that means that trying to promise > compatibility for it is generally a bad idea. I don't qu

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Robin Burchell
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > Or rather could, if the interface wasn't a moving target. If an interface is a moving target, that means that trying to promise compatibility for it is generally a bad idea. Once something is made public, you're stuck with it. For a very lon

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Topi Mäenpää
> Can you please elaborate a little bit more what you want to say by: > > ".. discussions about buying Digia's development resources to the project." > That is to say: "I'm a paying customer, so please pay attention" :) I even used to have a commercial license, but now I'm working for a new empl

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Topi Mäenpää
> It sounds like an interesting project. > > I just wonder why you prefer "pure" Javascript over QML? It's not so > hard to expose C++ objects or classes to QML, depending on whether > you want to use pre-created objects or create instances via QML > declarations. Are there some JS examples which

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Kuba Ober
On Nov 11, 2013, at 3:38 AM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > V8 was touted as the unifying solution for Qt JavaScript support. It > really would have made sense to use the same script engine everywhere. I > feared that the script engine would be changed once again and discussed > with Digia guys before

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread BogDan
Hi, [...] >  > I'm the author of Into (http://intopii.com/into, > https://github.com/topiolli/into/) and a long-time Qt programmer since > version 3. I'm currently in charge of designing a new generation machine > vision platform that builds on Qt. To add some weight to this I'd like > to me

Re: [Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Rutledge Shawn
On 11 Nov 2013, at 9:38 AM, Topi Mäenpää wrote: > Consequently, I have needed to hack my extensions by using hidden > low-level APIs. As mentioned, this was just a matter of finding a > pointer to the internal QScriptEngine in Qt4. In Qt5, I have used the V8 > API directly. Now that 5.2 uses a n

[Development] QML and JavaScript extensions

2013-11-14 Thread Topi Mäenpää
Hi, A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about this issue on Qt forums (https://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/33278/) and was advised to bring it up here. So, here it goes again. I'm the author of Into (http://intopii.com/into, https://github.com/topiolli/into/) and a long-time Qt programmer sinc