FWIW, we've been exploring and talking about having V8 driven Gtk, instead of Moz one.
My humble, and working, attempt to at least have ES2015 syntax and features, and a more NodeJS friendly environment for GJS is here: https://github.com/WebReflection/jsgtk#jsgtk All GJS examples run either out of the box or after making them more JavaScriptish: https://github.com/WebReflection/jsgtk-examples#jsgtk-examples And there is also a Twitter client based on WebkitGTK+ https://github.com/WebReflection/jsgtk-twitter#a-desktop-client-for-twitter-mobile Best Regards On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Adrián Pérez de Castro <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting Jay Strict (2016-06-28 11:57:31) > > On 28.06.2016 08:05, [email protected] wrote: > > > I am fairly certain GJS is the more frequently used of the two, in > GNOME > > > applications at least. In any case, GJS is not just used for GNOME > > > Shell, but also several applications like GNOME Documents (which itself > > > uses WebKitGTK), GNOME Weather, etc. > > > > > > And after all, I don't suppose it's a burden to include a dependency on > > > Python for the Python shim. You might be able to write WebExtension > > > shims for any number of interpreted languages and make them an optional > > > part of the build. In package-based distributions, for example, they > > > could be shipped in separate packages. > > > > That would not help in the Gnome shell extension use case then, if you > > have to install a seperate package. Gnome shell extensions should work > > for different distributions no matter which extra packages are installed > > or not. > > I must admit that this is a very good reason to go with GJS instead of > Seed. > Thinking about usage in GNOME, probably it makes more sense to start with > GJS > first, and forget about supporting Seed for now. Maybe I'll try to make a > standalone proof-of-concept shim loader like the Python one using GJS when > I have some time — though there's still a couple of other tasks waiting in > my list of WIP tasks for WebKitGTK+, so I cannot commit to a date, sorry. > > <kinda-offtopic> > In an ideal world, GNOME shouldn't need to depend on two separate > JavaScript > engines, and the Shell would use JavaScriptCore somehow (either making GJS > depend on JSC instead of SpiderMonkey, or via Seed). Of course at the time > when GJS appeared SpiderMonkey was chosen —probably I would take that > decision > myself back then, too—, and code in the Shell depends (still?) on some > features which are available in SpiderMonkey only, so now we have to live > with > that. > > I would love to see GJS ported over to JavaScriptCore, to avoid having both > JavaScriptCore and SpiderMonkey working at the same in the same process > for an > application, but I am aware that it is not a motivating project because GJS > “just works right now” and if GJS switched to JSC probably the Shell would > need modifications as well. Not to mention making sure that there are no > regressions, and that then the Shell would depend on WebKitGTK+, whic > itself > could open another can of worms... > > So no, I do not see GJS switching to JSC anytime soon. Unfortunately. > </kinda-offtopic> > > Cheers, > > -- > ☛ Adrián > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-gtk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-gtk > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-gtk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-gtk
