[opensource-dev] Client-side scripting in Snowglobe
lenglish5 at cox.net
Fri Feb 19 11:07:35 PST 2010
Robin Cornelius wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net> wrote:
>> There's more to a language then just the syntax. CLR-based Smalltalk is
>> NOT real smalltalk, for example.
>> There's no way except perhaps via F# to get something approaching
>> smalltalk programming out of a CLR-based system.
> Well Morgaine's socket based idea could over come this very easily. If
> the API was exposed via a socket, LL could provide a plugin loader
> much as they do for the MediaAPI now, if they want, this pluginloader
> could be CLR based and the default LL implementation of plugins could
> be mono assemblies. So the plugin loader could be directly used by any
> language that can produce CLR binaries.
> If someone else comes along who does not use CLR, they could just
> directly use the socket API with what ever lanuaguage they wanted
> either directly, or via another plugin loader, but importantly, in
> their lanugage of choice.
> Sandboxing could easily be provided by the default LL pluginloader so
> that out of the box implementation provides a save environment for any
> downloaded scripts. But someone else who wants to call native
> functions can from, again, any thing they like if it supports sockets.
> I think something along these lines could provide something close to
> maximum flexibilty.
Sure. ANd in that case, I have no real objections. There's durned little
difference between having a command parser written in C#, C++, or
whatever and if one can use CLR scripts directly but still be able to
evoke the internals of the system via a socket interface, that's fine.
Personally, if I ever wrote a Mac-only client, I'd use fscript as the
internal scripting language because that is far, FAR slicker than
anything CLR-based, but I'm a Mac fanboi.
More information about the opensource-dev