Netscape and ActiveState To Cooperate on Development
Wednesday May 24th, 2000
Well, my programming abilities under Mozilla just doubled, and gave me another top reason to push my clients on Mozilla. This is great news!
I think mainly what activestate is doing is building an IDE *from mozilla*:
More reason for me to learn Perl. And in other news, IE might become a seperate company.
I am confused! Rhino is OSS and so are Python and PERL so this is like saying "here, I will give you this free programming language for free, now... Let's do a press release!" :)
Read the press release!
"As part of this process we expect to make several contributions to the Mozilla code base, especially in the area of cross-language communication and extending the XPCOM component model," said Dr. David Ascher, Senior Developer and Project Lead, ActiveState. "By providing bridges between Perl and Python and the Mozilla framework, we are giving the Perl and Python Open Source projects deep access to the power of Mozilla."
Basically, it sounds like activestate will be doing all the gruntwork of making mozilla fully scriptable from perl and python. Fun stuff!
And if you want to indulge in some really crazy thoughts, remember that the current perl "pumpking", Gurusamy Sarathy, works for active state. Maybe mozilla will end up embeded in perl! ;-)
#10 They better WORK, girl...
Wednesday May 24th, 2000 6:20 PM
This late in teh game, either they're not going to try for NS6 final / Moz1.0, or they're going to throw a bunch of developers on this to get it up to speed FAST...
#13 Re: Re: What is this?
Wednesday May 24th, 2000 8:20 PM
> And if you want to indulge in some > really crazy thoughts, remember that > the current perl "pumpking", Gurusamy > Sarathy, works for active state. > Maybe mozilla will end up embeded in > perl! ;-)
I thought he was the Python guy. And mozilla could never be "embedded" in Perl *or* Python, although someone could write packages in either that could contain Mozilla code.
This sounds great so far. I've always liked how you can use just about any language with IE and all that automation stuff, however flawed an implementation and insecure some may feel that it is.
I'm wondering how they will go about allowing multiple scripting languages for event handlers. One nice way I've seen is in Prototype:
Click on the Scripting link in the frame.
You'll notice this code looks a lot like XUL, but instead of embedding code into an attribute, they use a tag that has attributes to signify the target language:
<?xml version="1.0" ?> <!DOCTYPE Window SYSTEM "proto.dtd"> <Window Id="App1" Title="Hello World" Width="200" Height="120"> <Panel id="p1"> <Text Id="Text1" Pos="10,10,170,20"></Text> <Button Id="But1" Pos="45,45,105,30" Caption="Press Here!"> <!-- the setText is a method available for the target object, in this case a JTextField from the JFC. This method can be any method of this class or from one of the superclass of this object. See Bean notes below --> <onMouse Event="Clicked" Target="Text1" Language="BEAN"> <script>setText("Hello World") </script> </onMouse> </Button> </Panel> </Window>
He gives examples of TCL, Python, and use of JavaBeans as well on that page.
onclick.perl="" would seem sensible to me...
How does IE do it?
#11 Re: Re: Fantastic
Wednesday May 24th, 2000 6:21 PM
IIRC, you can specify the scripting language by using the proprietary LANGUAGE attribute.
#15 W3 current stuff and reserved-for-future-use stuff
Wednesday May 24th, 2000 8:34 PM
I just looked around the w3's DOM docs, and found this:
They have a few attributes reserved for future use in the SCRIPT tag, namely "event" and "htmlFor". Maybe this could develop into something.
As for current stuff, looking at:
They give examples of things like:
<button...> <script language="text/tcl"> .... <script> </button>
Looks like they're just using it in that location for convenience because they manually assign the tcl procedure to the onclick property of the element after writing it. (But I didn't notice them doing that in the vbscript example??)
They also talk about ways to set the "Default" scripting language in the meta information.
Hopefully most of that stuff should suffice.
#8 What does this mean for page authors?
by kb7iuj <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Wednesday May 24th, 2000 3:26 PM
I'm sure this must be a really dumb question, but does this mean we'll be able to say something like:
<SCRIPT Language="perl"> <!-- ... //--> </SCRIPT>
in our HTML/XML documents?
<P> I'm a huge fan of Perl and all. But unless you have some really strict rules regarding security you're going to run into trouble. I'd rather have it "secure by default" than to make it easier to script. We all know what happens when we plug more and more scripting into programs - witness last weeks .vbs fiasco.
<P> I'd love to see a <B>small</B> subset of Perl make it in. Something like the regex support, the text manipulation, maybe some DBI stuff, but I could do without any sort of filesystem access unless it had to use XPConnect methods.
Perl has a "taint" switch, whch basically stops your program from using any data obtained from an outside source (file, STDIN, Enviromental vars) to affect anything w/o "clearing" it first. For instance, you could not pass "rm -r -f *" directly to the system if you put it in a query string on a form -- you have to check the value in a regular expression (presumbly checking for such dangerous strings first). This is an old, old function of Perl, predating it's use as a CGI tool, and is quite robust. It won't save a stupid programmer by itself (you have to choose to use it), but it can _definitly_ help. Python, I would wager, has somthing similar. There is a "miniperl", as well, designed just for embedding. But I don't think it's too necessary to take a lot out -- most of the mass in in the libaries, which you'd simply pick and choose from. On my system, my perl binary directory is about 2 Megs, with the perl.exe being 50k. I have 20 Megs of libaries, but I have a LOT of extranous stuff.
#17 How useful would this be?
Thursday May 25th, 2000 12:15 AM
There are good reasons for a single, standard web scripting language.
However, making mozilla scriptable *by* Perl and Python seems like a good idea. Additionally, does anyone know what AppleEvents Mac Mozilla supports besides the four basics, if any? AppleEvents allow scriptability on Macintosh by any language, including AppleScript.
You're right, I don't see it as very useful on the browser-scripting side for now. In the future? Who knows.
I concur with you, the focus of this will be in connecting Perl/Python to the Mozilla system. That's obviously, with the IDE announcment, where ActiveState is going, and it's a VERY good thing. Perl people are notorious for hacking _everything_; there's a napster client written in Perl, interfaces to AIM, a SMTP server, and so on...look at <http://www.cpan.org/> for examples.
Now, imagine the extentions that the Perl and Python communities can provide for Mozilla. Junkbuster? No problemo. Bookmark manager? A couple of hours.
WOW. I'm drooling already.... :) So, yes, I agree 100%
#18 Can you say Perl and Python COMPONENTS?
Thursday May 25th, 2000 4:00 AM
Perl and Python on the other hand...
#21 Re: Can you say Perl and Python COMPONENTS?
Thursday May 25th, 2000 2:07 PM
#22 Re: Re: Can you say Perl and Python COMPONENTS?
Tuesday May 30th, 2000 4:41 AM
XPConnect? Now this is starting to look interesting - make my real stuff with C++ and call JS to execute it.
Then comes along JS components, which really opened my eyes. JavaScrit has finally earned its place among other "real programming languges" in my book.
XPConnect and JS components are the things that make JS powerful in my view. They did not exist before Mozilla.