Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

No console.log available (only print?) #12

Open
radare opened this issue Nov 20, 2015 · 10 comments
Open

No console.log available (only print?) #12

radare opened this issue Nov 20, 2015 · 10 comments

Comments

@radare
Copy link

radare commented Nov 20, 2015

No description provided.

@creationix
Copy link
Owner

Correct, you can implement your own console object using print.

@radare
Copy link
Author

radare commented Nov 28, 2015

What about making it node compatible? :p

On 28 Nov 2015, at 01:05, Tim Caswell [email protected] wrote:

Correct, you can implement your own console object using print.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@creationix
Copy link
Owner

This would be a fine project, but it outside the scope of dukluv's immediate goals. Right now I'm still trying to find time to finish solid libuv bindings for duktape.

@mamod
Copy link
Contributor

mamod commented Nov 30, 2015

@creationix I have some work with duktape and porting it to complete nodejs api, I use my own tiny event loop library for that task, I just started to play with dukluv and I think making a nodejs compatible using dukluv will be much easier, it's just a fine piece of work, I'll keep playing and if you're interested I'll ping you once I have something working.

@creationix
Copy link
Owner

@mamod sounds great, let me know if you hit any more issues at the duktape/libuv layer.

@creationix
Copy link
Owner

@mamod, in particular, I'm not happy with how dukluv currently does objects. If you can think of a better API style, I'm all ears.

@mamod
Copy link
Contributor

mamod commented Nov 30, 2015

Wow, that would be great and very generous of you.
I'll do some prototyping and see if I can be useful :)
Thanks

@creationix
Copy link
Owner

@radare, "making it node compatible" is no small task. Rewriting luv (lua + libuv bindings) took me a few weeks of full-time work. I've spent over a year working on the node.js style sugar layer on top for luvit.io (also mostly full-time work). Don't underestimate the amount of effort required to get from libuv in duktape to a full node.js drop-in replacement. Also it's a moving target.

@mamod
Copy link
Contributor

mamod commented Nov 30, 2015

@creationix you're totally right, it's not an easy task, I tried to make a nodejs port to perl a year ago, didn't finish because of lack of time back then and lots of issues, so I feel what you had to go through when you wrote luvit which is another great piece of work by the way. I'm currently working on a port to duktape comojs and it's not an easy task, in these 2 implementations I tried to write pure (javascript & perl) libuv emulation which was the main factor for complexity, on the other hand I think working with dukluv should be easier because I'm considering using node modules as is then just write wrappers around duktape and dukluv, this time I don't have to deal with libuv directly :)

nodejs being a moving target is another issue, but first let's hope things will be as easy as I think :P

@aquawicket
Copy link

A little late to the party. I've been using Duktape with RmlUI (formerly) librocket, to piece together a VERY basic DOM implementation. https://github.com/aquawicket/DigitalKnob/tree/master/DKPlugins/DKDom If you can abstract away from the DKLibraries, it'll give ya some good ideas. I still have a lot of faith in Duktape

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants