I looked up progress in Kotlin and Kotlin/native and you are right, they are doing most of the things I had suggested for JavaFX.
Thanks, Steve Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 4, 2018, at 12:06 AM, John-Val Rose <johnvalr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, if your interest is mainly in the future “cross platform king” of > languages, you might just want to have a look at Kotlin and Kotlin/Native. > > Oh, and I have heard you can develop JavaFX apps with Kotlin too! > >> On 4 Feb 2018, at 13:37, Stephen Desofi <sdes...@icloud.com> wrote: >> >> Yes, probably me. >> >> Sent from iCloud >> >>> On Feb 03, 2018, at 09:35 PM, John-Val Rose <johnvalr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> Well, then one of us is "off topic"... >>> >>> >>> Kevin Rushforth: >>> >>> "We are specifically looking to discuss ideas around the following areas: >>> * Easing barriers to contribution (e.g., making JavaFX easier to build, >>> better documentation, making it easier to test changes) >>> * Code review policies >>> * API / feature review policies >>> * Code review tools (we currently use webrev, but that isn't set in stone)" >>> >>>> On 4 February 2018 at 13:29, Stephen Desofi <sdes...@icloud.com> wrote: >>> >>>> John, >>>> >>>> I think you and I are thinking on two different levels. You are >>>> talking about the mechanics of making contributing to JavaFX easier. I >>>> am talking about making the motivations of contributing to JavaFX easier. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> Sent from iCloud >>>> >>>>> On Feb 03, 2018, at 09:14 PM, John-Val Rose <johnvalr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Stephen, >>>>> >>>>> 1. Swift and your "crystal ball" view of its spectacular success in the >>>>> future has nothing whatsoever to do with making contributing to JavaFX >>>>> easier. >>>>> >>>>> 2. Like everyone else who already wants to contribute to JavaFX, we don't >>>>> need someone to provide us with "a compelling story as to why developers >>>>> should join and contribute". >>>>> >>>>> 3. TL;DR >>>>> >>>>> John-Val Rose (trying to be polite) >>>>> >>>>>> On 4 February 2018 at 12:58, Stephen Desofi <sdes...@icloud.com> wrote: >>>>>> John, >>>>>> >>>>>> The point I am making is that Swift is catching up as a cross >>>>>> platform toolkit and is available on: >>>>>> >>>>>> Mac and iOS, (Full Support) >>>>>> https://www.swift.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Android (early) >>>>>> https://academy.realm.io/posts/swift-on-android/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Linux: (early) >>>>>> >>>>>> https://itsfoss.com/use-swift-linux/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Windows: (early) >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.infoworld.com/article/3067364/open-source-tools/swift-for-windows-arrives-at-last-but-as-an-unofficial-port.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Browser: (very Preliminary) >>>>>> >>>>>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46572144/compile-swift-to-webassembly >>>>>> >>>>>> Server Side: (Mac and Linux) >>>>>> https://www.swift.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So my point is that soon Swift will steal the Cross Platform Mantra from >>>>>> Java. It is happening very quickly and Swift has great graphics and >>>>>> gaming capabilities as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why would a new developer start with Java? If we are looking 10 years >>>>>> out, I think Apple is coming head on. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also when you say this thread is about the ease with which the community >>>>>> can contribute to JavaFX, it begs the question "what kinds of >>>>>> contribution?". Are we here to push the platform forward and >>>>>> contribute new ideas or just do bug fixes? >>>>>> >>>>>> Swift is a real threat to Java being the cross platform development >>>>>> King. Java can hold on to that story for only a couple more years. >>>>>> It surely won't last. >>>>>> >>>>>> Dart also runs on Android and iOS via Flutter, has Server side Dart >>>>>> option, runs in the Browser very well today with full support for SVG >>>>>> and Canvas -- and if WebGPU becomes a Web standard, Google will most >>>>>> certainly support it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking toward the future, if Java doesn't run in the browser, doesn't >>>>>> support games on any platform, and only works on iOS and Android via >>>>>> Gluon VM, and does it with only limited graphics capability, then I >>>>>> think JavaFX will be a tough sell in the future. Even tougher than it >>>>>> is today. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the point of the discussion is to build the developer community, I >>>>>> think we first need a compelling story as to why developers should join >>>>>> and contribute. >>>>>> >>>>>> The fact that I am using Dart and JavaFX, and I am seriously considering >>>>>> if I should switch to Dart everywhere, or to Dart and Swift (instead of >>>>>> Dart and FX) means JavaFX doesn't have the lead we think it does. I >>>>>> love JavaFX and would love to contribute, but it's hard when I myself am >>>>>> looking at other options mainly because I also want my software to be >>>>>> here 10 years from now, and I am seriously questioning if JavaFX will >>>>>> keep up. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think there is a small window of opportunity for JavaFX to make a >>>>>> stand before it is permanently relegated to a Server side language. >>>>>> This cross platform story won't fly too much longer, especially when >>>>>> Swift starts to run everywhere and in the browser too, and if Google >>>>>> does the same thing with Dart, and they both support games, where will >>>>>> Java be? >>>>>> >>>>>> If we are looking 10 years out then surely this will happen. The big >>>>>> question is what will we do, and where will JavaFX be? >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve Desofi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 03, 2018, at 03:09 PM, John-Val Rose <johnvalr...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>
