digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Building desktop Linux applications with JavaScript

arstechnica.com — Ars takes a close look at Seed, a new framework that allows software developers to build GTK+ applications with JavaScript. The popular web scripting language could soon become the dominant application extension language on the Linux desktop.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 20, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

52 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • rowjimmy, on 01/19/2009, -0/+22see, i understand why having some kind of "standard" for application extension is a smart idea, but i'm not sure why javascript would be the immediate choice for this. fta, "JavaScript could be used as high-level glue for user interface manipulation and rapid prototyping while Vala or C are used for performance-sensitive tasks." - fair enough, but conceivably any language could serve as this "high-level glue". the article mentions javascript's prototype objects as a way to get interesting (and admittedly hackish) behaviors; but this isn't the web, there's no need to come up with hackish solutions (most of which developed out of the necessity caused by a server/client split) - why not use something like Ruby or Python, thus inheriting both the cleanliness & the potential power of modern high-level languages? as somebody who has worked in the past developing web-based apps, the amount of poorly written javascript out there frightens me - and the thought of this filtering over to the desktop causes me to shudder.
  • inactive, on 01/20/2009, -1/+14Those who don't understand Linux are doomed to make stupid comments on it.
  • cenarta, on 01/20/2009, -1/+14My first reaction is: "For the love of God NO!!!!!!!!!!!"

    Then, if I think about it. My biggest gripes with programming JS on the web is making it cross-compatible (thank goodness for JQuery). Maybe it's not such a bad idea, since on the desktop there will probably be a standard engine to render the code and on its own the language is not that bad.
  • alexlafreniere, on 10/13/2009, -1/+11Exactly, I don't think JS is the best choice for application extensions on the desktop, that's more what I'd use Python for and what most everybody else already uses. To me, this just seems unnecessary, but definitely a cool experiment.
  • mehan, on 01/20/2009, -12/+21mrbabyman = autobury
  • inactive, on 01/20/2009, -0/+8Use PyGTK. Unlike JavaScript, python has a standard implementation, and it's included on virtually every linux desktop. Plus it's a far superior language.
  • DangerCollie, on 01/19/2009, -2/+10This came at a good time for me. I'm working on a prototype application that uses a wireless broadband connection but needs to keep working even if the connection is broken. If we ran the app locally and did the data uploads background with AJAX, that would probably be okay. As long as we get the data, it doesn't matter if it gets uploaded later.
  • rowjimmy, on 01/19/2009, -0/+7i'm not sure if you read the article, but - while one potential use is that one could build an entire (desktop) app in javascript - the main idea is that you could use javascript to do embedded (eg, plugin) programming atop of pre-existing applications, using javascript to interact with GTK and the existing app. from the short description of your project, this does not seem to be relevant in the slightest.
  • aufte, on 01/20/2009, -1/+7New digg rule: Democracy, it works like this, if you don't like it, digg it down / bury it.
  • tuxisawesome, on 01/20/2009, -0/+6I've used PyGTK, but I much prefer Qt and C++. I'm not sure about the Qt Python bindings.
  • LeviTheSmith, on 01/20/2009, -0/+5http://digg.com/users/syntaxgs/history/comments

    Do you have an apostrophe key?
  • RobotBuddha, on 01/20/2009, -0/+5I'd say wxpython myself. A bit closer to true cross platform support, and it uses gtk in linux anyway.
  • JohnFlux, on 01/20/2009, -0/+5And? Shuttleworth provided what the community wanted - a charismatic leader.
  • ldog, on 01/20/2009, -0/+4The event models are also completely different. Try adding events to dom objects on the fly in a consistent manner.

    Try getting the location of a mouse click in div tag in a consistent manner.

    Both css AND differences in the DOM are things you need to handle if you intend to make a cross-browser application.
  • concertina, on 01/20/2009, -1/+5???

    Adobe air is most definitely not open source. Royalty-free, yes. But not open source.
  • rowjimmy, on 01/19/2009, -0/+4oh, and while i'm complaining, i think - if one is dead set on the idea of using a light-weight scripting language for embedded programming - Lua would be a better choice.
  • steve220585, on 01/20/2009, -0/+4It isnt?

    Try developing an "advanced" javascript based web application that uses "advanced" functionality that javascript provides without a framework doing the hard work for you and you will see that CSS/HTML is the least of your worries when dealing with cross compatibility issues in javascript.
  • MrBabyMan, on 01/20/2009, -2/+6I'm running Hardy Heron on a virtual server. Does that count?
  • crimsonredmk, on 01/20/2009, -1/+4I hope everyone know that Shuttleworth does not come up with ideas or execute them at all, not by himself and not even his goons do it. He simply overhears what might be a good idea that's very practical and missing in the first place and dresses it up nicely and then somehow relates it to the next version of Ubuntu. The actual volunteer coders don't get any credit other than an "About" mention in outdated documentation.
  • inactive, on 01/20/2009, -0/+3It's funny that you would say that because I learned ECMAScript in a day.
  • UberNick, on 01/20/2009, -1/+4Adobe AIR has built-in javascript support, thus enabling multi-platform desktop apps written in js with an AIR wrapper. I think this opens up a lot of potential as well.
  • vade79, on 01/20/2009, -1/+4Cross-compatible javascript is not a real problem, it's CSS/displaying that is the problem. The only real problem for javascript is ActiveX stuff in IE("ajax"/xml/etc) which is nominal at best.
  • JohnFlux, on 01/20/2009, -0/+3Steve,
    > Shuttleworth is not the guy, he has been merely placed on a pedestal by a large portion of the linux community and is just running with it.

    So, he's liked by a large portion of the linux community, and yet you claim he's not charismatic? Do you not see the contradiction there?
  • inactive, on 01/20/2009, -0/+3Yeah, Qt is nicer than GTK, I was just saying, if you want to use GTK, at least use it with a respectable language. PyQt is pretty nice, though.
  • RobotBuddha, on 01/20/2009, -0/+3Same here. I dislike closed source on principle, but I'd much rather have the look and feel of air on all platforms than gtk on one.
  • crimsonredmk, on 01/20/2009, -5/+7Doesn't that defeat the purpose of "democracy on Digg"?
  • inactive, on 01/20/2009, -2/+4Man, I am happy for JavaScript. Dude's achieved a lot. And he's like a friend of mine, who I grew up with. Party on!
  • ldog, on 01/20/2009, -0/+2While there's plenty of bad javascript out there, there's also plenty of well written javascript too. Things like dojo and jquery have made it much easier to write things more complex than popup windows and client side form validation.

    Most of the hacks I've seen deal with the fact that http is stateless, as well as DOM inconsistencies mostly between Internet Explorer and the browsers that follow standards.

    Using javascript for desktop bindings wouldn't suffer from either of those two problems.
  • the2989, on 01/20/2009, -0/+2Being as though I just got done with a javascript class, this makes me happy. I might have to install Linux again :)
  • KibibyteBrain, on 01/20/2009, -0/+2This is a big deal, it could mean more extensible apps in the vein of Firefox. However, extendability in this fashion also causes lots of problems for Firefox that other deeply compiled or managed code type programs don't seem to suffer as badly, so I still am skeptical about whether or not this is the approach to take, especially when there are very strong plugin development models and tools for linux already that use native languages.
  • steve220585, on 01/20/2009, -0/+2Idog, not to mention the selection models across browsers, At least the event models share somewhat similar functions to do similar things with different names, the selection models are complete and utterly different, different names, different structures, missing functions across the board depending on what browser you are using, etc etc. :X
  • steve220585, on 01/20/2009, -3/+5If the linux community truly had a charismatic leader, linux would be alot further ahead then it is now.

    Shuttleworth is not the guy, he has been merely placed on a pedestal by a large portion of the linux community and is just running with it.

    Although Ubuntu has made some good progress, it has nothing to do with shuttleworth, it has alot to do with the people actually coming up with these ideas and developing a workable prototype of it.
  • conebone69, on 03/02/2009, -3/+5there is no democracy on digg. while I am not one of these people who bury stories purely off of who submitted it, the people who do have a legit case. I saw three stories yesterday submitted by MrBabyMan on the front page in order from 1, 2 and 3. now do you think thats just a coincidence?
  • Egroh08, on 01/20/2009, -3/+5Same here.
  • brettalton, on 01/20/2009, -0/+1What did he do? Can someone explain?
  • logic11, on 01/20/2009, -0/+1You use JS because of the sheer number of people who know it and the number of libraries devoted to the kind of interface manipulation that are already out there. Python is a far better language, but it doesn't do quick interface manipulations nearly as well. I think that prototype is probably the deciding factor. I also think that ldog hit it right on the head as to why it won't be the same kind of cludge that web apps suffer from.
  • newwatch51, on 01/20/2009, -0/+1Actually, it is. A few years back, I made some JavaScript games for IE. None of them run in Firefox.
  • newwatch51, on 01/20/2009, -0/+1I taught myself JavaScript when I was 13. It's not very hard.
  • inactive, on 01/20/2009, -3/+3We don't have to worry about cross-engine stuff on Linux, since we won't be dealing with that ***** internet ***** explorer.
  • manojvekaria, on 01/20/2009, -2/+2adobe air already does this cross platform. win mac linux. plus the fact that adobe air 1.5 was the first engine to implement webkit JIT compiling for javascript. I don't see a reason to use this solution, adobe's tools are much advanced, free and open source.
  • borgheses, on 01/20/2009, -1/+1i guess... if your using it when you make the post!
  • Davbis93, on 01/20/2009, -1/+0.hta (Hypertext applications) have served a useful purpose on windows for some time.
  • DefiniteFail, on 01/21/2009, -1/+0...and everyone of them has to be complete *****, instead of just focusing development on one or two.
  • steve220585, on 01/20/2009, -4/+0Every single thing on linux has to have 1000 alternatives. Thats why.
  • basemodel, on 01/20/2009, -5/+1Isn't this kind of going backwards? Aren't we trying to make Javascript more native *across* platforms?
  • gilbes, on 01/20/2009, -7/+2I see, I just described how a successful competitor implemented scriptable automation and plug-in capabilities available pervasively across the entire desktop stack. Features that Linux desktop is trying to implement, over 10 years later.

    And that somehow demonstrates that I lack knowledge of these technologies, Linux in particular.

    Methinks you didn't think your post through very thoroughly. But Linux evangelists never do. Things like Power Shell (an evil MS technology) aren't something true Linux users are looking for. No one would be caught dead around that. Well, except the real sysadmins demanding it. But they don't exist, because when you shut your eyes the world disappears.
  • borgheses, on 01/20/2009, -11/+5new digg rule #2: mr babyman shall not submit articles about linux unless using said variant of operating system.
  • gilbes, on 01/20/2009, -12/+6FTA: "Shuttleworth suggested that the Linux community could deliver a lot of extra value by making scriptable automation and plugin capabilities available pervasively across the entire desktop stack."

    Welcome to Windows 95+. Windows Script Host and COM (collectively referring to OLE, OLE Automation, COM+, DCOM and the dreaded ActiveX).

    "Those that don't understand Windows are doomed to recreate it."
  • dxxvi, on 01/20/2009, -7/+1IMHO, javascript is harder to learn than Java + GWT. If you agree with me, then "building desktop Linux applications with GWT" is more reasonable.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.