Hi there,
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 11:27 +0000, timofonic timofonic wrote:
What about supporting more languages for extensions instead? Lua seems
interesting, there are other languages that couldbe supported too.
Sounds fine to me; AFAIR Lua has a tiny / trivial run-time. Lua 5 is
MIT licensed, and it is apparently a popular scripting language.
It would need discussion of course, but I personally have no problems
with another 200k on disk for a new always-there scripting binding. The
problem of course is - finding someone to write the bridge code: could
it be you ? [ the work is quite easy, and we can find a mentor for it ].
I think LibO should be completely functional with all the features
without the use of heavy dependencies like JVM.
Ideally yes. Those that suggest the tasks get tasked with them ;-) so -
how can we best help you make this a reality ?
All the best,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@novell.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.