Does anyone know how Google and Apple respond to publish requests for purely webview apps? If this is possible it'll make SpiderBASIC the most powerful app-dev tool out there since none of the others except the core SDK and xcode support dialog widgets without roll-your-own using 2D drawing or a few cookie cutter dialogs..
If anyone has ever done a ready-for-market app for Android or IOS that was more than primitive functionality you know why I ask. All there is are the core libraries and then a lot of high level 2D languages where you have to procedural create everything..
If we can do this I can post full source for IOS and Android apps here where you can just change a few strings and have a ready SpiderBASIC app, maybe even Windows phone too later when I have time to mess with C#.
If I recall Google was fine with it but Apple rejected it.
Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
-
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 3:02 pm
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
As tools such as Cordova and CocoonJS target iOS I guess it's OK.
The Apple restriction as I understand it is that any interpreted code must be included in the installed package, it can't be downloaded or created subsequently.
The Apple restriction as I understand it is that any interpreted code must be included in the installed package, it can't be downloaded or created subsequently.
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
JS falls under that category, I wonder if it's domain sandbox design exempts it?the.weavster wrote:As tools such as Cordova and CocoonJS target iOS I guess it's OK.
The Apple restriction as I understand it is that any interpreted code must be included in the installed package, it can't be downloaded or created subsequently.
I'd love to use SpideBASIC and cut dev time in half for apps..
-
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 3:02 pm
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
I don't think which language is being interpreted is relevant, the point is the code being interpreted must have been part of the package approved by Apple as acceptable to be available from the app store, it can not be downloaded or edited after the event.tj1010 wrote:JS falls under that category, I wonder if it's domain sandbox design exempts it?
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
the.weavster wrote:I don't think which language is being interpreted is relevant, the point is the code being interpreted must have been part of the package approved by Apple as acceptable to be available from the app store, it can not be downloaded or edited after the event.tj1010 wrote:JS falls under that category, I wonder if it's domain sandbox design exempts it?
That basically means no to the whole topic then. SpideBasic is like 97% JS. I'd still use it for FB and HTML5 games and apps, although I don't do many. JSON based web management back-ends too.
-
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 3:02 pm
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
I would say it means it's entirely possible should SpiderBasic ever target Cordova (or similar runtime) which I would imagine is something Fred/Freak have in mind.tj1010 wrote:That basically means no to the whole topic then. SpideBasic is like 97% JS. I'd still use it for FB and HTML5 games and apps, although I don't do many. JSON based web management back-ends too.
Whether or not SpiderBasic is 97% JS is irrelevant. You'd write your code in SpiderBasic, the SpiderBasic compiler would turn it into HTML/JS and you'd have some utility that packaged that output with the Cordova runtime to create an app for your target platform.
-
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 3:02 pm
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
Take a look at the thread I started about Manifold JS, I think it might be of interest.
Re: Using in IOS and ASDK webview apps?
I think to implement sockets or http you'd have to patch in to runtime or webview class to allow cross-domain ajax or access to socket api do to domain policy and sandboxing of JS. Otherwise you don't even need any framework, just put the SB data in resource section of the app bin and write it to webview using app storage relative paths.
I'd bet the approval process doesn't even have code auditing, they just check for remote code execution and obfuscation using signatures, and make signature of binary in byte blocks. Malware authors don't seem to have a problem getting on to the stores..
I'd bet the approval process doesn't even have code auditing, they just check for remote code execution and obfuscation using signatures, and make signature of binary in byte blocks. Malware authors don't seem to have a problem getting on to the stores..