Re: Scripting in Gnome

[Jody Goldberg <jody gnome org>]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 06:38:31PM +0000, jamie wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 18:16, Jody Goldberg wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Who cares about 20% ?  Orbit2 is far more compliant and stable than
> > Orbit1.  We're talking about scripting here.  Orders of magnitude
> > are important, a few percent are not.
> 
> I care. I would like to see bonobo (or some other COm technology) be
> used all over the place instead of api calls via bindings for c headers.
> It would be nice if GTK could have a bonobo interface too and therefore
> everyone would have a choice whether to use bonobo or c header bindings
> for any function. 
>
> Of course for that to be practical, bonobo has to be fast and efficient
> and thats sadly not the case with the current corba back end. 
> 
Existence and ease of use trump performance in this situation.
Bonobo is completely orthogonal to this discussion.  It was an ever
thinning layer on top of corba with some useful objects.
 
> Just think of all the effort that would be spared in creating bindings
> whenever a library changes and yes scripting would be a hell of a lot
> easier then.
> 
> A nice componentised  OO interface which is truly language independant
> and fast - is that too much to ask for?

certainly not.  We'd all like to see something with those
properties.  The question at hand is _how_ not _if_.

> I am hoping D-Bus will come to the rescue...

That seems to answer a completely different set of issues.
Why would you want to use it as a transport mechanism ?