Dalibor Topic wrote: > Hi Alexander, > > --- Alexander Hvostov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> At issue is not convenience, but speed. Swing is horribly slow, so any >> effort to speed it up seems worthy to me. > > Just do it ;) Try getting in touch with the author of the gcj native swing > implementation, and see if you can get it to run with any of the free VMs. If > you can put it up somewhere, I could take a shot at integrating it into kaffe, > which has an Xlib based AWT, if the license permits it (kaffe is GPL).
I have no idea who the author is, so how am I supposed to do that? All I remember is a mention of this thing. >> Having a pure Java Swing implementation to fall back on is a good idea IMO, >> but having a pure Java Swing implementation at the expense of a faster >> native implementation when the latter is available seems foolish. > > I think that it's better to develop the fallback first, and then, with all the > acquired knowledge of Swing's internals, build an optimized native > implementation. You could do that. > But since I'm not going to do it, at least not in the next couple of years (I'm > busy enough with merging in stuff into kaffe's class libraries), don't let my > concerns prevent you from doing it. This is open source/free software > development after all, you can do whatever you want, and if it turns out to be > cool, I'd be very glad to link to it ;) What about the concerns of that being way over my head? :P Alex.
