daniel at syrinx.net
Fri Aug 13 14:04:38 CEST 2004
Peter Hansen wrote:
> Christopher T King wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Peter Hansen wrote:
>>> In the vein of Jython, I wonder what it would take to build
>>> a Flython? (Lousy name, I know.) That would take Python
>>> source, presumably a subset since some things couldn't be supported,
>>> and compile it into ActionScript bytecode (aka the bytecode compiled
>>> from ECMAScript source for the Macromedia Flash player environment).
>> I don't know much about ActionScript bytecode, but I think a general
>> Python -> ECMAScript translator wouldn't be too hard (presuming a Python
>> subset is acceptable). ECMAScript variables are untyped, so that should
>> ease translation some. Sounds like my weekend project!
> Well, it's not the source code that I care about, it's the
> object code (as in, the Flash bytecode). The only ECMAScript
> to Flash bytecode compilers of which I'm aware are
> commercial and expensive, and come with big useless (to me)
> GUI/animation/freaky special effect generation systems...
> There are advantages in Python direct to Flash bytecode with
> a simple command line compiler (particularly if one uses
> test-driven development...).
> This may be where I have to dig into an area that's outside
> my expertise, namely the compiler.py module, parse trees,
> and code generation...
I have to agree that Python compiled to swf bytecode would be very handy
indeed. I'm no fan of HTML-based web applications, but there are
currently few alternatives. Flash could be an excellent alternative, but
few developers want to take the time to learn (and purchase!) the Flash
authoring application to create a better web GUI.
I *like* "Flython" as a name! :) A flying python! I can see the logo now...
More information about the Python-list