On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 07:23:21PM -0400, Karl Dahlke wrote:
> > I guess with tidy5 we'll be wanting to go for 3.6 as the next release
> 
> I don't have strong feelings about this; whatever you and Chris think.

I'd go for 3.6 if given the choice, making 3.5.4 (the currently being worked on release) the last release in the 3.5 series.

> > I'm also thinking we should get a stabilised tidy5 based html parser before
> > we start playing with pulling the DOM into a separate process?
> 
> Yes, and definitely yes.
> Don't move all the chess pieces at once.
> And it really will bring benefit: more web pages parsed properly,
> all the nodes building js objects not just some of them,
> all the html attributes becoming members in the corresponding js nodes
> not just some of them, etc etc.

Yes definitely.

> > Next on my edbrowse todo list is to evaluate how ready the duktape js engine is
> 
> A good trial is to
> cp jseng-moz.cpp jseng-duk.c
> and then modify the latter to use the duktape engine calls
> and ideally we could just plug either one into edbrowse and they should
> both work the same.
> Good side by side comparisons.

Yeah that's the plan. It'll also be a good test of how adaptable the protocol
between edbrowse and edbrowse-js is in terms of passing around memory 
addresses etc.

> I wanted to do the same with v8 but never got round to it,
> and the v8 interface isn't as easy as I had hoped.
> I never even got hello world to run
> or even compile: js_hello_v8.cpp

Indeed, I'm thinking that v8 really isn't an option here.

Cheers,
Adam.