3 ms·
Something like Qt wouldn't help much. Even if you provided a scripting bridge so that extension authors could distribute one plugin for all platforms, the exten
by msbarnett 10y ago
Something like Qt wouldn't help much. Even if you provided a scripting bridge so that extension authors could distribute one plugin for all platforms, the extension model is wrong -- if I have to subclass a Qt component to extend it, then my extensions don't compose with everyone else's.
You'd need to use Qt to build an extension framework that exposes document contents in a way that all extensions can customize their display simultaneously -- and at this point you're just creating an ad-hoc, less well-understood DOM.
- kuschku 10y ago> You'd need to use Qt to build an extension framework that exposes document contents in a way that all extensions can customize their display simultaneously -- and at this point you're just creating an ad-hoc, less well-understood DOM. QtQuick with QML and their scripting engine? It has a full DOM, scriptability, and extensibility.
- msbarnett 10y agoSure, you could do that. You're using a less well known DOM, which will probably discourage extension authorship somewhat. AFAIK Qt's "v4" is a v8 fork, so scripting performance is probably a wash. It's hard to imagine that the DOM renderer in QML is really much better performing than Webkit, and anyway it's not really DOM rendering that's the slow part in Atom -- VS Code proves that. I don't know what you'd really hope to gain from this, in other words. "Atom is more-or-less just as slow but has a less well known DOM" doesn't strike me as a compelling engineering decision.