Re: Small embeddable scripting language ?

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:16:06PM +0000, rob wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2002-11-28 at 12:12, Biswapesh Chattopadhyay wrote:
> > <snip>
> 
> > 
> > Jens: Thanks for the great idea about JavaScript - don't know how I
> > missed that ! Going through the docs, JS seems to have:
> >       1) Pretty familiar syntax
> >       2) Lots of developers
> >       3) Available on any GNOME platform - thanks to Galeon et al.
> >       4) Small and fast
> >       5) Actively maintained and well documented
> >       6) Easily embeddable
> >       7) UTF and Unicode enabled
> > 
> > Seems to fit Anjuta's needs nicely indeed !
> > 
> > Lots of people have been suggesting Python - I intend to give that a
> > closer look as well, but currently, JS seems to be the best choice to
> > me. Also, standalone build sizes seem to be pretty small as well.
> 
> Here are two problems with JS.
> 1 no namespaces, so calling one script form another isn't going to be
> nice.
> 2. really ugly, its very easy to write hard to read code in js (though
> not as easy a some;) ,python code, on the other hand is easy to read so
> reuseing other peoples scripts is much eaiser in python than it is in
> js.
> 
> and a 3 it's difficult to anything more complex in js then a mouse over
> (which may not be a problem as I don't really know what sort of things
> you want to be able to do with the scripts) .  

Also (4): where is a library implementation of ECMAscript (which is the
only "standard" for Javascript there is)? You can't just take a couple
of files from Mozilla and drop them in.

Malcolm

-- 
Always try to be modest and be proud of it!