Regarding the GTK3 dependency, I filed JDK-8227808 [1] a couple days ago
to fail at build time if the GTK3 libraries aren't present, rather than
generating a library that doesn't run. I also just updated the Wiki.
-- Kevin
[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8227808
On 7/17/2019
I see that Tom Schindl filed the Enhancement request.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228357
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 11:08 PM, Tom Eugelink wrote:
Hm. Being able to just debug JavaFX will seriously lower the threshold
for people to get on board. Personally if I run into a library
as requested by Kevin - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228357
- I filed in in the other category because i could not find a better
matching one.
Tom
On 18.07.19 08:18, Robert Lichtenberger wrote:
> I started from scratch today and was able to compile and use JavaFX with
> debug
I started from scratch today and was able to compile and use JavaFX with
debug information.
When trying to start the test application an error was thrown: no glassgtk3
in java.library.path;
Now thanks to the debugging information beeing present I was able to debug
GtkApplication like a charm and
Hm. Being able to just debug JavaFX will seriously lower the threshold for people to get
on board. Personally if I run into a library that is behaving faulty and I need to
download and compile it first, I'm already not very happy (it's a hassle). But ahm...
cygwin, visual studio, directshow
Thanks for the information. Maybe something in my setup was wrong. I'd also
appreciate if the default builds would contain debug information, this
would make JavaFX much more "developer friendly".
Robert
Am Do., 18. Juli 2019 um 00:04 Uhr schrieb Kevin Rushforth <
kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>:
>
I did a quick test and the difference in size is noticeable, but not
huge -- on the order of 10% larger with the local symbols. You could
file an enhancement to have a binary available with the local symbols
(or to add them to the default build), but I don't know whether it's
generally useful
I think I saw that one of the argument for not providing debug symbols was
size... If there is anything I would not quickly compromise on nowadays is
size. Even my smartwatch has gigabytes of internal storage. If size is an issue
for an application, it is usually not caused by including debug
Well the main problem is that if there are no local var you can not set
conditional break points in the code, inject syserr logging to
understand what is going on and what your code does to FX.
One could provide 2 artifacts one with and one without debug symbols.
Tom
On 17.07.19 19:12, Kevin
Mainly size. Generally if a developer is going to debug JavaFX to point
of wanting to look at local variables, it doesn't seem a stretch for
them to build JavaFX.
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 9:57 AM, Tom Schindl wrote:
so what is the reason to strip them (i guess it it size) it is extremely
so what is the reason to strip them (i guess it it size) it is extremely
painful to don't see local-variables, have parameter names, arg1,arg2, ... .
Tom
On 17.07.19 17:01, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
> When you say that don't see a problem, what exactly do you mean? If you
> are able to see the
Oh I see. I should have read the text more carefully. I confused local
with internal variables.
I can indeed not see variables with a local scope inside a method and I
also don't see the
names of parameters. They are named arg0, ... but I do see their values.
This behaviour seems to be
When you say that don't see a problem, what exactly do you mean? If you
are able to see the local variables in a production build, then that
would in fact be surprising. The production builds, including EA builds,
should be being built with "-PCONF=Release" which would exclude vars.
Someone
Hi,
I don't see any problem of that kind with Eclipse, on MacOS, JavaFX
13-ea 9 via Maven.
Michael
Am 17.07.19 um 16:45 schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
That should have been enough to enable local variable symbols. We have
the following logic for JavaCompile tasks:
That should have been enough to enable local variable symbols. We have
the following logic for JavaCompile tasks:
compile.options.debugOptions.debugLevel = IS_DEBUG_JAVA ?
"source,lines,vars" : "source,lines"
IS_DEBUG_JAVA is true if CONF is either Debug or DebugNative.
Maybe
I'm trying to get to the bottom of some weird layout problems in my
application.
To that end I want/need to debug JavaFX classes.
But when I step into JavaFX classes I don't see local variables or
parameter names.
So I thought debug symbols are probably stripped from the official builds.
I
16 matches
Mail list logo
