So Tom are you saying that javafx.base and javafx.graphics are the only “core” modules in JavaFX?
Has that ever been officially stated or established? How can javafx.controls or javafx.fxml not be considered core modules? There’s not much you can do with JavaFX without controls and FXML (albeit optional) is a critical part of most JavaFX apps. > On 6 Jan 2019, at 20:27, Tom Eugelink <[email protected]> wrote: > > But (I assumed charts was in core as Ramon said) taking a look at the > javadoc; charts are in the controls module, not in the core (javafx-base or > javafx-graphics). So that seems quite ok. > > https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/docs/api/javafx.controls-summary.html > > >> On 6-1-2019 02:58, John-Val Rose wrote: >> I doubt any JavaFX application would use ALL the features so couldn’t you >> make the same argument for “detachment” about many other parts of JavaFX? >> >> And what are the “core components”? That is probably a subjective question. >> >>> On 6 Jan 2019, at 00:56, Ramon Santiago <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Yes, I meant removing charts from the core of JavaFX and moving he charts >>> to a separate JPMS module. >>> >>> Why? They are not really core components are they? They are dead weight in >>> applications that never will use them. >>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 8:44 AM John-Val Rose <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi Ramon, >>>> >>>> I personally have never seen or heard of any such discussion and I’m not >>>> entirely sure in which context you are using the word “module”. >>>> >>>> Do you meaning simply removing charts from the core of JavaFX or do you >>>> mean creating the charts as an actual module within JPMS? >>>> >>>> Either way, can you tell us why you have thought of this idea? >>>> >>>> Graciously, >>>> >>>> John-Val >>>> >>>>> On 6 Jan 2019, at 00:33, Ramon Santiago <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> rjs >>> >>> -- >>> rjs > >
