At 02:35 PM 6/14/99 -0700, you wrote:
>From: David Janszen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> 2D looks to me like it is sort of a peripheral gizmo, taped and stapled
>> onto the actual language. I assume there will be or are offerings from
>> outside Sun that better meet 2D's design goals, but feel that it would be
>> nicer if Sun had it together in this area.
>
>Well, except for the language syntax itself and whatever's in java.lang,
>*everything* in Java is sort of peripheral. How do you feel that Java2D
>differs in this respect from, say, AWT or RMI or Applets? They're all just
>libraries. Java2D did have the extra burded of having to fit in with the
>legacy of AWT's models from version 1.0 onwards. Is that what you mean?
What I mean is that some of the terminology in 2D is so far off the mark
that it appears that 2D was written without regard for any part of the
existing World, the AWT included. The documentation is also very poor, but
at least I know this is being corrected. I can not help but assume that
2D's functionality mirrors its terminology and documentation, and will
resist further study of 2D until the last possible moment, presuming I can
not find something better.
>
>I suspect most third party offerings will tend to build on Java2D rather
>than replace it.
I do not think that any sane group would consider building on such a murky
swamp.
>It would certainly seem a little counter-productive to do
>otherwise.
If an alternative exists, then spending time internalizing 2D in its
current state would seem exemplary of counter-productive activity.
>
>Cheers,
>Pete
>
>
>
