I did some quick research and found an good post on stackoverflow from 2010.
In order to provide SWT for our application on different Plattforms we
indeed need to include all the different SWT jars in our product. The good
news is: There are not so many (win32/64, linux32/64 and osx32/64) and, as
far as I read it, it’s not that hard to do. We don’t need to “manually”
load it, we can load the needed JAR “on the fly” using reflection [1].
This post is also mentioned on the SWT FAQ page, therefor I think SWT for
cross-platform isn’t that uncommon or to hard to do.
[1]
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2706222/create-cross-platform-java-swt-application/5784073#5784073
Regards,
Matthias
2014-09-16 10:40 GMT+02:00 Stefan Rossbach <srossb...@arcor.de>:
> On 16.09.2014 09:36, Lutz Prechelt wrote:
> > Regarding the idea to use the SWT browser component for Saros-E
> > as well as Saros-I:
> >
> > Holger wrote:
> >> do we really want to include SWT in our libraries?
> > If it makes our life simpler: yes.
> >
> > Does it make our life simpler?: We need to find this out.
> >
> > - There is obviously no problem for Eclipse.
> > - Can SWT be a separate plugin in IntelliJ?
> > - Is it common in IntelliJ that users have an SWT plugin already?
> > - If not: What mechanisms are there in IntelliJ to load
> > the SWT library at Saros-install-time?
> > - If none: How difficult would it be for us to release
> > three(?) different versions of Saros-I, one per platform?
> 1. There are issues with SWT and AWT on Mac.
>
> For Windows you would need: SWT for Windows = X64, X86 version where it
> still depends if you want to bundle them each to a different
> distribution or to include them both.
> For the later case you have to manually load the correct library.
>
> For Unix ... I do not know if different X11 GUI (KDE, GNOME, etc) need a
> different SWT implementation. For each such implementation you still
> need the 32/64 Bit Version again ? (
> I do not know if it is possible to load 32 Shared Object files into 64
> Bit address space. Windows does not allow that).
>
> For MAC I do not know the details.
>
> Conclusion: It is not that simple.
>
> Regards,
> Stefan
>
> >
> > The result may well be: Too difficult, we don't do all this.
> > But so far it still looks promising to me.
> >
> > Lutz
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Want excitement?
> > Manually upgrade your production database.
> > When you want reliability, choose Perforce.
> > Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
> >
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> > _______________________________________________
> > DPP-Devel mailing list
> > DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Want excitement?
> Manually upgrade your production database.
> When you want reliability, choose Perforce.
> Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> DPP-Devel mailing list
> DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want excitement?
Manually upgrade your production database.
When you want reliability, choose Perforce.
Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
DPP-Devel mailing list
DPP-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dpp-devel
