--nextPart7362032.JTk4HCr4rP
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Saturday 07 October 2006 17:58, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> The question is really: for whom do want to make our applications
> scriptable?

 I agree, that if we are talking about scriptability for applications,=20
then there should be no restriction of what is used, but I oppose to=20
have default functionality for applications implemented in script=20
languages. For (a completely made up) example, I would oppose having=20
the clock applet for kicker written in Ruby/Python, but I don't oppose=20
to the possibility to extend kicker with script applets. It's perfectly=20
fine to give the users and developers freedom how they want to extend=20
our applications.
 I think the basic desktop should work just fine without a need for a=20
language interpreter. Compiled code rulez. ;-)
 If we are talking about complete applications written in a script=20
language, I'm fine with them, even shipped with KDE, if - again - they=20
do not provide basic desktop functionality. A game or an edu=20
application is fine, if I don't use it, I don't need an interpreter.=20
But a calculator in script language would be bad IMO.

Just my 2 cents.

Andras

=2D-=20
Quanta Plus developer - http://quanta.kdewebdev.org
K Desktop Environment - http://www.kde.org

--nextPart7362032.JTk4HCr4rP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBFJ8KDTQdfac6L/08RAuAdAJ9yqZ6X/CeANk2+dn3yDLXO70EX2wCfeWcn
oMsUxKDQF1WgtWy5MX17p/E=
=7HhJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart7362032.JTk4HCr4rP--