Re: Scripting choices [Was: 2.4 Module List - zenity]

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM>]

On Sun, 30 Mar 2003, Havoc Pennington wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 09:51:38AM +0530, Biswapesh Chattopadhyay wrote: 
> > I did a sort of informal survey about this on the lists a few months
> > back and the consensus was that:
> > 
> > 1) We *really* do need a common (official) scripting framework.
> > 2) Python should be the official scripting language.
> > 
> 
> It seems to me that this thread was about an embedded scripting
> language, similar to Lisp in Emacs. i.e. the app would have to have
> explicit support for scripting and export specific bindings.
> 

Which would take a whole bunch of time and effort if we want the bindings
to be both non-ugly and semi-stable over time.

> However, for functionality such as AppleScript (much more simple
> macros, and you want ALL apps to support it with no extra effort) it
> seems to me that you want to use the accessibility hooks. Those
> already let you record and perform all GUI actions.
> 
> If we used the accessibility hooks for scripting I think it'd help a
> lot with getting better testing and out-of-the-box workingness on
> those hooks, as well.
> 

In the context of 2.4 and probably also 2.6, scripting using anything but
the accessability hooks looks unlikely. Of course, you could do it the
same way that UNO scripting works, assume everything is a object, and
provide a way for teh script to find out what is what and how to operate
on it. Having both "bonobo" and "g" objects makes the life a bit more
interesting though.

>
> Havoc
> 

	Sander

	Humans love to categorize and organize things. We break up time into
	hours, days and years. Everything has to have a name, a history, an
	understanding of it's origins and must be indexed somewhere on Google.