I don't know what sound system we are using. I'll see what I can find  
out.
On May 14, 2009, at 12:07 AM, ad wrote:

>
> p.s. I'm particularly interested in Linux/PluseAudio compatibility on
> Gentoo.
>
> On May 13, 10:59 pm, ad <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Josh,
>>
>> What is the status of the current whip effects on javafx?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> On May 13, 10:22 pm, Joshua Marinacci <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 13, 2009, at 3:16 PM, phil swenson wrote:
>>
>>>> "JavaFX Script is a great new language, but it is not the successor
>>>>> to Java. JavaFX is for GUIs. That's it's focus and using it for
>>>>> anything else will end in pain. :)
>>
>>>> Have any specifics on how "anything else will end in pain."?   
>>>> JavaFx
>>>> has a lot of features I like and seem general purpose to me:   
>>>> events/
>>>> properties, list literals, no primitives, etc.  But I haven't  
>>>> actually
>>>> used it of course.
>>
>>> Much like Java, JavaFX Script steals a lot of cool features from  
>>> other
>>> languages. However, it was designed first and foremost as a GUI
>>> language. It is intimately tied into the JavaFX runtime and GUI
>>> constraints. I'm not saying it wouldn't work for other purposes, but
>>> you could probably find better alternatives.  One thing that JavaFX
>>> Script lacks is any notion of threading. Everything is done on the  
>>> GUI
>>> thread, or is handled in a background thread for you by APIs, or  
>>> uses
>>> some other abstraction that hides threading. All GUI work is on the
>>> GUI thread, and all binding evaluation and updates happen on the GUI
>>> thread.  Obviously this wouldn't be ideal for a server side
>>> application. :)
>>
>>>>> "I'm not convinced that there will ever be a successor to
>>>>> Java because I don't think the world wants new general purpose
>>>>> languages. It wants sets of languages & apis & tools that are
>>>>> targeted
>>>>> at solving particular problems. The future is lots of languages
>>>>> running on the common JVM and underlying JRE runtime. "
>>
>>>> That I don't buy.  I think that the key is that any new general
>>>> purpose language should be able to be bent to your will.  In other
>>>> words, any possible successor should support rich meta-programming.
>>
>>> I'm not going to pretend that I'm smart enough to know what people
>>> will be programming with in 10 years. All I know is that a lot of
>>> effort is being put into making the JVM the ideal place for a  
>>> variety
>>> of next generation languages. I suspect JavaScript, Ruby, Python,
>>> Groovy, Scala, and JavaFX Script will all be popular languages 10
>>> years from now.  I sincerely hope PHP isn't. :)
>>
>>> - Josh
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to