tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6028449519062514692.post4675811331624431194..comments2023-09-11T12:02:42.908-04:00Comments on ha4: WebSharper Goes Green: Staph Genome VizAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08313802559573057206noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6028449519062514692.post-69312218031942062042012-01-25T09:09:43.601-05:002012-01-25T09:09:43.601-05:00Hi David,
This is an excellent question!
I would...Hi David,<br /><br />This is an excellent question!<br /><br />I would definitely prefer F#-style bindings as well.<br /><br />Most of our bindings, however, tend to be much closer to JavaScript in style. The reason is that it takes much less time to provide a bare-bones JavaScript-style binding than a proper F#-style binding, and we are just short of time to properly maintain good F#-style bindings for all extensions (it is a continuous process as they keep getting updated). Some bindings are even completely or partially machine-generated by parsing JavaScript and documentation files.<br /><br />Doing the bindings is not very pleasant work. A lot of JavaScript APIs we have to deal with are quite terrible, informal, inconsistent and hard to provide types for.<br /><br />It would be lovely to have a formal JavaScript API description standard that could be consumed by tools like WebSharper and GWT to provide typed bindings, and shift the maintenance burden to the JavaScript library developers.<br /><br />AntonAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08313802559573057206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6028449519062514692.post-40765289644323509932012-01-24T20:49:53.034-05:002012-01-24T20:49:53.034-05:00Hi Anton, I was wondering when designing extension...Hi Anton, I was wondering when designing extensions for WebSharper if you were trying to match the js library's signature to allow someone who knows the library and/or read it's documentation to have an easier time with the extension or if you generally attempt to make it friendly in the context of F# and perhaps a functional style.<br /><br />I obviously would prefer the later because I suck at web.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09835386915394787925noreply@blogger.com