On 22.01.22 13:35, Ilmari Lauhakangas wrote:
On 22.1.2022 13.27, Julien Nabet wrote:
Hello,
Reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeanShell, specifically:
"Since Java 9, Java instead includes JShell
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JShell>, a different read–eval–print
loop
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read%E2%80%93eval%E2%80%93print_loop>
(REPL) shell based on Java syntax, indicating that BeanShell will not
be continued"
I wonder if we could remove Beanshell part from LO.
Also, we use Rhino as Javascript engine (Rhino is written in Java).
Some people proposed C/C++ engine like Spidermonkey or V8 (see
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97827) but it
seems they may be problematic too because of instable API and specific
GC, see Michael's comment here:
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97827#c7
another problem is that Rhino cannot simply be replaced by packging yet
another JS implementation; if you look at the examples we ship, they have:
importClass(java.lang.Thread);
importClass(java.lang.System);
so any existing Rhino based macros will likely use the Java APIs and
cannot work with a non-JVM based JS implementation.
importClass(Packages.com.sun.star.uno.UnoRuntime);
importClass(Packages.com.sun.star.lang.XMultiComponentFactory);
importClass(Packages.com.sun.star.awt.XDialogProvider);
importClass(Packages.com.sun.star.awt.XDialog);
importClass(Packages.com.sun.star.uno.Exception);
importClass(Packages.com.sun.star.script.provider.XScriptContext);
also, Rhino relies on the Java-UNO bridge and some Java glue code in the
scripting model to provide access to UNO APIs; this would need to be
reimplemented in the form of a bridge for any non-JVM based JS
implementation.
