Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Lars Gullik Bjønnes <larsbj <at> ...> writes: > > | Can someone explain how this "embedding" works? LyX itself understands > > | LFUNs not Python so we'll still need to translate the python to a > > | series of LFUNs, no? > > > > Yes. So imho it is simpler to write a lib python/ruby/java/whatever > > that connects to the lyxsocket and runs lfun commands over that. > > (or perhaps something else than lfun. we haven't really put any effort > > into the lyxsocket to make it usable and powerful.) > > I read lots of stuff about application X has embedded scripting > language Y. What does that actually mean? What do these other apps > (say OOffice, KWord) have that we don't?
I guess I should do my own research ;-) http://blog.emptycrate.com/Embedding_a_Scripting_Language We don't expose a C/C++ API to the outside world so there's nothing for a scripting language to get its hooks into. I guess we've made the decision not to expose our API because we use LFUNs to do everything. LFUNs are our public interface. That feels like a good decision from a security POV. Why'd anyone want to enable a scripting language to be able to execute lyx::support::unlink f.ex.? What do I miss? Angus
