Stephen - I’m not quite following you. This thread is about improving the ease with which the community can contribute to JavaFX.
I see no point in comparing JavaFX (a cross platform graphics toolkit for JVM languages) with a Swift (a general purpose programming language that runs on Apple hardware). > On 4 Feb 2018, at 00:18, Stephen Desofi <sdes...@icloud.com> wrote: > > This begs the question, why has the bar been set too low? I am new to this > community and don’t know much history other than a couple weeks of bug fix > messages flying by. > > I am not even clear of what our role and purpose is supposed to be. Are we > here for only bug fixes, and follow the direction and flow that is already > set, or as contributors would we be allowed to contribute to the goals and > direction of JavaFX? > > FX is a good platform with great potential, but it biggest deficiency is > “mind share”. People don’t see too many real world accomplishments that > knock your socks off. Most people use web and phone to run apps. PC and > Desktop apps are a small part of the market. > > Gluon has just recently released gluon VM and Gluon Mobile to allow FX on > phones and tablets. > > The problem I see is once I can use FX on phones how will it compete with > Swift? > > True that “write once, run everywhere” is important and Java has a lead over > Swift. But Swift has a lead on capability. > > In the end Swift will catch up with Java in the “write once, run anywhere” > mantra. Will FX catch up with Swift in graphics by then? > > Java has a lead in many areas, but if we look 10 years out, it seems clear to > me that Java needs to raise the bar or face extinction as a client side > development platform or forever be confined to the server. > > This is why I need some clarification as to what our role as contributors is > going to be. I don’t believe an open source project can flourish if the > contributors have no say or stake in the direction. > > Steve Desofi > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Feb 2, 2018, at 11:55 PM, John-Val Rose <johnvalr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I think Kevin outlined in his opening post what would be considered "out of >> scope". >> >> However, I agree with you on the basic premise that, in general, the bar has >> been set way too low as to the potential use cases and performance of >> JavaFX. In fact, I firmly believe that games & complex visualisations etc. >> *should* be possible with JavaFX given that most of the heavy lifting is >> being done by the GPU. It's just that, at the moment, the scene graph >> rendering pipeline is significantly slower than it could be and it is for >> this reason that we don't find applications using advanced 3D graphics & >> animations etc. (like we see in games) being built with JavaFX. It's just >> not possible when the node count reaches even a very small threshold. >> >> This is a topic I have tried to discuss numerous times and also believe that >> I can improve the performance of the scene graph rendering in a very >> tangible way. >> >> If things pan-out as they are being described and becoming & being a >> contributor is simplified to the extent where it justifies me devoting a >> large chunk of my time to OpenJFX, this is probably what I would want to >> work on first. >> >> Graciously, >> >> John-Val Rose >> >>> On 3 February 2018 at 14:07, Stephen Desofi <sdes...@icloud.com> wrote: >>> I don’t understand why discussing new graphics capabilities such as gaming >>> or WebGPU, etc is so off limits. Can you explain that? >>> >>> Steve Desofi >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> > On Feb 2, 2018, at 8:51 PM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > Looks like we have some good discussion so far. >>> > >>> > I see a few themes emerging (build/test, sandbox on GitHub, ease of >>> > filing bugs, etc) along with some discussion on graphics performance >>> > (which is fine as long as the discussion doesn't veer too far into >>> > discussing specific graphics features). >>> > >>> > I'll let more folks chime in before I reply to anything specifically (and >>> > I'll be offline over the weekend anyway). >>> > >>> > Thanks! >>> > >>> > -- Kevin >>> > >>