On Tuesday 15 September 2009, Tommi Mikkonen wrote: > Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > Frame is not a QFrame, it's a Plasma::Frame. > > WebView is not a QWebView, it's a Plasma::WebView. > > Ok, accepted; the problem is that I'm aiming at porting > from QtScript to Plasma, and this is one of the things where > I constantly make mistakes. Can I create a QFrame inside a > plasmoid then? Or should I always use Plasma Frame? > Moreover, is there real difference to the developer which > widget is being created, or is this just a matter of which > API has been opened? > > How about LinearLayout? According to > http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials/Plasma/JavaScript/CheatSheet > it constructs a QGraphicsLinearLayout, but is this > really a Plasma item, too?
simply a QGraphicsLinearLayout, we don't have qgraphicslayout subclasses in the api at the moment > > any suggestions for getting enums into the JS namsepace? > > Not at present; I think that we will have to live with > the stuff where we have made the binding. > > > yes, there isn't a nice debugging system yet.. > > Qt Script comes with a nice debugger, so moving to that environment > will introduce improved capabilities automatically. Of course, the > facilities > will not be available if there are other VMs that are used as well. > > > i'm not so sure. learning the difference between Plasma::WebView and > > WebView, depending on the script bindings used, is probably pretty > > nominal compared to becoming acquainted with the entire Qt API. > > As I'm currently aiming at porting QtScript apps to Plasmoid, > I'd like to get as much access to Qt as possible. Probably this is not > a typical situation, but for me there has been a lot of problems with > Qt widgets vs. Plasma widgets and things that are not available > in the latter. But you are right, to someone who is new to the > entire system things can be different. the api of plasma widget is limited to protect the simple js bindings, in the full ones there could be the access to nativeWidget() i suppose, so they could have the full api of the underlying embedded qwidget > > > also note that the simple applet JS bindings do not bind the entire API > > of all the classes offered, either. > > I've noticed. What's the reason of offering these particular > classes? Has there been a particular set of apps in mind? I've > tried porting a number of Lively apps, and the ones that would > fit the layouting idea run to a dead end since they would like to > use the web, and the standalone apps on the other hand would > need access to QColor, QPolygon (our first real demo, Asteroids) > etc. > > tjm > > _______________________________________________ > Plasma-devel mailing list > Plasma-devel@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel -- Marco Martin _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel