gl2 draws 2D objects while opengl draws 3D objects, so that I guess you may mixed them together.
jqt support OpenGL out of box without the need of osmesa, see http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/OpenGL%20ES Сб, 16 мар 2013, McGuinness, Brian писал(а): > I was using an isigraph window to display a 3D > gl2 plot on my MacBook Pro. When I tried to run > the program on a 64-bit Ubuntu Linux box there > was a problem initializing the graphics display. > As I recall, the problem was lack of support on > 64-bit systems, but it's been a while so I don't > recall all the details. > > The nice thing about J6 was that it was very easy > to lay out a GUI using by dragging items onto the > form editor. I could then edit the automatically > generated code to line things up more precisely. > > I certainly hope that wd will be maintained. There > should be upward compatibility from one J version > to the next so people don't have to keep drastically > revising their code. > > --- Brian > > On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 09:24:47 +0800 > bill lam <[email protected]> wrote: > >wd in J8 is open source so that it won't die if users continue > >to maintain it. > > > >J602 wd supports both 32 and 64 bit where J runs. Which > >platform or specific features did you have trouble with? > > > >Пт, 15 мар 2013, McGuinness, Brian писал(а): > >>The wd interface should be a permanent part of J from > >>now on. The J6 wd and the associated GUI design tool > >>made it very easy to create GUI-based J applications > >>that were reasonably portable between platforms. The > >>only major flaw was a lack of support for 64-bit > >>platforms. > >> > >>When J7 came out with completely different interfaces, > >>I felt as if the rug had been pulled out from under me. > >>Why use J at all if one can't count on a stable > >>platform to work with? Java would then be a better > >>choice. Also, while I experimented a bit with JHS, > >>I never did anything with JGTK due to the lack of > >>user documentation. A few sample programs do not > >>constitute adequate documentation, nor does a > >>pointer to documentation for the C/C++ GTK API. > >> > >>If J8 continues to support wd and the GUI design tool, > >>and these work on 64-bit platforms, then I will > >>seriously consider writing GUI-based applications > >>in J once again. But I'm not interested in playing > >>a constant game of catch-up with an ever-changing > >>platform, and I'm sure most other people feel the > >>same way. > >> > >>--- Brian > >> > >>On Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:26:01 +1300 > >> Ric Sherlock <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>The wd implementation vastly simplifies the GUI landscape for > >>J6/J7 > >>>users. > >>>It is much easier to port existing apps to J8 and IMO provides a > >>>simpler > >>>and more powerful GUI design experience compared the old J6 wd, > >>>while at > >>>the same time being vastly more consistent across platforms. > >>> > >>>As I see it there are a couple of additional benefits of the > >>have > >>>in the J > >>>IDE written using wd: > >>> a) once the wd Qt interface becomes stable there should be much > >>>less > >>>reason to need to provide new binaries. Further > >>>development/maintenance of > >>>the ide/qt addon could then take place without any requirement > >>to > >>>install > >>>new binaries each time, simply upgrading the addon using Package > >>>Manager > >>>would do the job. > >>> > >>> b) It provides a proof-of-concept of the wd GUI framework for a > >>>more > >>>complex application, as well as a great source of examples of > >>how > >>>to use it > >>>to create an application. > >>> > >>>Assuming performance would be acceptable, maybe it's something > >>that > >>>could > >>>be looked at for J8.1 or J9? > >>> > >>> > >>>On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 11:12 PM, chris burke > >>><[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>>> how feasible it would be to write the ide using the wd > >>>>interface? > >>>> > >>>>It could be done, though we would need to extend wd a little. > >>>> > >>>>However, I don't think there would be much benefit. With > >>earlier > >>>>J > >>>>versions, we felt that having the IDE in J meant both that the > >>>>code would > >>>>be much simpler, and also easier for the end user to customize. > >>>>The first > >>>>no longer holds with Qt, i.e. the amount of source for the Qt > >>IDE > >>>>is about > >>>>the same as the source for the old J wd IDE (and both very much > >>>>smaller > >>>>than for GTK). Also, we never really had end users customizing > >>>>the IDE. > >>>> > >>>>One thing I do notice with Qt is that the system is noticeably > >>>>snappier > >>>>than in J6 wd and J7 GTK. > >>>> > >>>>Incidentally, we didn't design it this way. Originally, the Qt > >>>>IDE had no > >>>>wd, and it was only because we wanted some simple windows, e.g. > >>>>for > >>>>viewmat, that we looked at it at all. Bill and I worked on this > >>>>for a few > >>>>days over Xmas, and to my surprise, found that implementing wd > >>>>would be > >>>>relatively straightforward. > >>>> > >>>>On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Ric Sherlock > >><[email protected]> > >>>>wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The wd interface for Qt seems to be rounding out really well. > >>>>It looks as > >>>>> though it is pretty fast and powerful as well as being quite > >>>>easy to use > >>>>> for J6 wd users. > >>>>> Currently the main part of the J Qtide is written directly in > >>>>C++. I'd be > >>>>> interested to hear how feasible it would be to write the ide > >>>>using the wd > >>>>> interface? > >>>>> What would be the downsides? > >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>> For information about J forums see > >>>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >>>>> > >>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>For information about J forums see > >>>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >>>> > >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>For information about J forums see > >>>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >> > >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>For information about J forums see > >>http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > >-- > >regards, > >==================================================== > >GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24 > >gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3 > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >For information about J forums see > >http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm -- regards, ==================================================== GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
