Alexandre Moreira wrote:
One of the best ways to have a scripting engine inside a plug-in-enabled software would be (IMHO, of course) the X-Chat approach, that is: to have the plug-in system powerful enough to accommodate the script engine on top of it, so that the scripts would be just as powerful as any plug-in and take the burden off the main developers.
So, what you say is that a good plugin system will be able to hold a scripting engine. As it is the same interface ?
I think my worry in this regard is that if this plugin or scripting system is not a part of the basic and early design, it will simply not be as powerfull as it need to be.
As a great side effect, the user that does not intend to use a certain script engine could just don't load the plug-in that provides it, and multiple independent developers can develop engines that make it possible for users to load plug-ins in different languages.
The "pay as you go" idea, so the main core will remain small and snappy, but it will be extensible.
I believe it is an all win situation, just would take long to get the whole plug-in architecture done before we (as in you, lol) can have any script support.
The only "problem" with a plugin architecture that it is more difficult to master, and will keep non c programmers from contributing.
PS: Unfortunately I couldn't get Geany to fulfill some very specific needs of mine (I have just been using Vim for too long) and I am not a user anymore, but I simply love the way and speed that it is being developed and watch the mail list and try to test a new release version every now and then.
Would a plugin and/or scripting possibility be able to help you making geany more the tool of your chooice ? If it could help, what level of integration would it then need ?