87 results for whip, oh my, I can't wait!
On May 13, 11:17 pm, Joshua Marinacci <[email protected]> wrote:
> We will be shipping javafx with the entirewww.freesound.orgarchive.
> We've decided that no apps should be downloaded on demand. Install all
> possible libraries and apps will be pre-installed with the JRE into
> your webstart. As a slight downside JRE installation will now take
> between 32 and 48 days, and you will be required to have at least 10
> TB of free space on your laptop. :)
>
> On May 13, 2009, at 11:59 PM, ad 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
