On Tuesday 03 October 2006 23:30, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> The
> extension scripting language is another issue, and here I think kross
> should be considered over javascript, no matter what was decided in Malaga
> at the unannounced scripting bof.
Yes I agree. And in the light of what Richard Dale said:

On Tuesday 03 October 2006 06:58, Richard_Dale@tipitina.demon.co.uk wrote:
> But having ubiquitous javascript 
> scripting and well designed dbus apis is a very important goal, and will not 
> add anything much in the way of bloat as far as I can see.

The kross library works using dbus binding. Which means, that with kross you 
get a good dbus binding, and support for any languages supported by it.

And as with kross, interpreters (python, ruby and kjs) are plugins, they are 
loaded only if the given language is installed on the machine. So no extra 
bloat if you don't want those other languages on your computer.

-- 
--- Cyrille Berger ---