> On 9 Mar 2018, at 19:09, Tim Murison <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd also like to echo and hopefully amplify what Jason H said about
> qmlweb. IMO, this is the solution that Qt should be embracing and
> integrating upstream. qmlweb aims to do what Qt has always done, make
> cross-platform development easy, efficient and indistinguishable from
> native development.
I think qmlweb and Qt for wasm are fundamentally different enough
(reimplementing Qt Quick vs recompiling it for a new platform) that they
are not mutually exclusive. We could accept either or both upstream,
It could be interesting to make them API-compatible so that users can
move between them with minimal effort. For example by providing a
“QtQuick.QMLEngine()”
Javascript API that can be used interchangeably with “QmlWeb.QMLEngine()”.
var div = document.getElementById('embed');
var engine = new QmlWeb.QMLEngine(div);
engine.loadFile('qml/main.qml');
engine.start();
Morten
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
