On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Carsten Haitzler <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 20:54:02 -0200 Felipe Magno de Almeida
> <[email protected]> said:
>> We have a policy of not auto-detection for configure and as little
>> optional options as possible.
>>
>> However, the JavaScript binding is a complicated beast because it can
>> be compiled against node.js, or against libv8, or against libv8 and
>> libuv. And this option must be made at autotools configure time.
>>
>> Cedric has proposed the generation would always happen to a specific
>> sub-directory where it could be configured separately and compiled.
>> However, I think this complicates things and I don't really see much
>> benefit.
>>
>> Currently, I have added a --with-js option which can be used as:
>> --with-js=nodejs/--with-js=libv8/--with-js=libuv.
>
> can we do this runtime with dlopen/dlsym fun?

Highly unlikely due to C++ mangling and the amount of inlined code
difference (think template and friends).

I have been giving more though about this and I think that in fact
most people will not want to compile the JS binding, but just use it
in node.js. What I am thinking is that we could always generate the
binding code for nodejs (Just to be sure it is something we can still
generate), but not compile it. We do setup another buildbot that will
do a daily build configured to fully build the node.js binding and
another that will help generate the release that should be pushed to
node.js for every release.

Also what is the difference between the --with-js=libuv and --with-js=nodejs ?
-- 
Cedric BAIL

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to