Brython - Python in the browser

[Pierre Quentel]

Le jeudi 20 décembre 2012 01:54:44 UTC+1, Ian a écrit :
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
> 
> > That says that my browser, Firefox 17, does not support HTML5. Golly gee. I
> 
> > don't think any browser support5 all of that moving target, and Gecko
> 
> > apparently supports about as large a subset as most.
> 
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28HTML5%29
> 
> > It is possible the FF still does not support the particular feature needed
> 
> > for the clock, but then the page should say just that. Has the latest FF
> 
> > (17) actually been tested?
> 
> 
> 
> It works for me using FF 17.0.1.
> 
> 
> 
> >> To create an element, for instance an HTML anchor :
> 
> >> doc <= A('Python',href="http://www.python.org")
> 
> >
> 
> >
> 
> > To me, that is a awful choice and I urge you to change it.
> 
> 
> 
> +1.  The DOM already has a well-established API.  The following may
> 
> require more typing:
> 
> 
> 
> link = document.createElement('a')
> 
> link.setAttribute("href", "http://www.python.org/")
> 
> link.appendChild(document.createTextNode('Python'))
> 
> document.body.appendChild(link)
> 
> 
> 
> But it is much clearer in intent.  Since these methods map directly to
> 
> DOM methods, I know exactly what I expect them to do, and I can look
> 
> them up in the browser documentation if I have any doubts.  With the
> 
> one-liner above, I don't know exactly what that maps to in actual DOM
> 
> calls, and so I'm a lot less clear on what exactly it is supposed to
> 
> do.  I'm not even entirely certain whether it's actually equivalent to
> 
> my code above.
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest that Brython should have a "low-level" DOM API that matches
> 
> up to the actual DOM in as close to a 1:1 correspondence as possible.
> 
> Then if you want to have a higher-level API that allows whiz-bang
> 
> one-liners like the above, build it as an abstraction on top of the
> 
> low-level API and include it as an optional library.  This has the
> 
> added benefit that if the user runs into an obscure bug where the
> 
> fancy API breaks on some particular operation on some specific
> 
> browser, they will still have the option of falling back to the
> 
> low-level API to work around it.  It would also make the conversion
> 
> barrier much lower for web programmers looking to switch to Brython,
> 
> if they can continue to use the constructs that they're already
> 
> familiar with but just write them in Python instead of JavaScript.

We don't have the same point of view. Mine is to offer an alternative to Javascript, with the simplicity and elegance of the Python syntax, for a programer who wants to develop a web application and doesn't know Javascript. Ultimately this means that the whole DOM API would be described without any mention of Javascript, only with the Python API

With this idea in mind, asking Brython to have a Javascript-like low-level API is like asking CPython to support iteration with a low-level construct like "for i=0;i<10;i++" along with "for i in range(10)". The Python engine is stable enough that we don't have to inspect the bytecode for debugging ; similarly, when Brython is mature enough, you won't have to look at the generated Javascript code (which you can do though, eg in the console)