Good luck to you Erik. I totally agree with you and hope you succeed. If there's any way I can help, I will do just that.
Felix > On 19 Apr 2016, at 04:39, Erik De Rijcke <derijcke.e...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm currently looking if I can get some robovm fork kickstarted. ( > https://github.com/FlexoVM/flexovm/issues/4 ). > > It's really a shame that for this one time Java has a real nice aot > llvm compiler, MS kills it. Being able to compile Java (or any > bytecode language) to a native, fast and small executable (especially > for arm/embedded use which does not require an Oracle license) would > be *really* cool. Let's see if we can continue to make this happen in > one way or another. > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Felix Bembrick > <felix.bembr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> So what AOT will you be using now? The last RoboVM AOT or something else? >> >>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:15, Johan Vos <johan....@gluonhq.com> wrote: >>> >>> Indeed, this doesn't have any impact on JavaFX. >>> The Gluon tools are currently using the RoboVM AOT 1.8, which was the last >>> open-source version. >>> >>> RoboVM delivered a whole set of products, including an AOT, but also a >>> system that provides some JNI functionality, a set of bindings that create >>> Java classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole >>> "Studio" allowing developers to create applications. >>> >>> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to >>> have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the >>> studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse. >>> >>> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices. >>> RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS >>> specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and >>> an Android specific UI. >>> >>> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a >>> platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great >>> developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue >>> working on their product. >>> >>> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference. >>> >>> - Johan >>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah <st...@weblite.ca> wrote: >>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this. >>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick >>>>> <felix.bembr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively >>>>> "shutting down". >>>>> >>>>> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/ >>>>> >>>>> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making >>>>> JavaFX viable on mobile platforms, what does this actually mean for that >>>>> goal? >>>>> >>>>> Is there an alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or >>>>> is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable >>>>> cross platform technology? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Felix >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Steve Hannah >>>> Web Lite Solutions Corp. >>>
