Mario,
thanks for your suggestion, but I think your specific case will not
justify the change. First of all, as it was already said, equals should
be symmetric. Knowing the implementation, you could rely on the fact
that either the equals is called on the provided listener or on the
listeners
Hi all,
I'm now a bit further along with this, though struggling to get the
matroska plugin to compile (getting a bunch of unresolved external symbol
errors for functions it uses in glib - not entirely sure why at the moment,
as I said C is not my strong point.) I've also noticed the plugins
curre
After showing some demos concerning JavaFX on iOS and Android we would like to
see any real world JFX app for iOS or Android. Is there anybody in the mailing
list who developed a real world app? What are your experiences? What about
performance?
Best regards,
Tobi
Hi,
I am using JavaFX deploy ant task and having issue trying to sign because of
jre embeded for Apple Store bundling. It is the last issue I have to fix then I
can finish my Apple Store submission.
Apparently even the jdk for the bundle has to be signed. To do that I had to
redo permissions
It would be useful to get a more complete description of the issue and
the error you are receiving. Also, this is probably better filed in the
Jira issue tracker at http://javafx-jira.kenai.com
In any case, if I were to guess the problem you're mentioning, it might be:
https://javafx-jira.kenai.co
Hi Scott,
Sure, that's in fact my eventual goal - but in order to successfully get
that far I need to work out how to compile OpenJFX with other GStreamer
plugins first, and unfortunately at the moment I seem to be getting stuck
at that hurdle!
Time permitting, I do indeed plan to look at address
I applaud your effort, but please consider while you are doing this:
Addressing RT-18009 is good
Addressing RT-2684 is way better.
https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-2684
If there is a mechanism to write a stub plugin that hooks into the GStreamer
plugin mechanism such that end users of Java
We should be consistent about what we return, although I agree that that the
actual value doesn’t seem to matter. 0 for imaginary pixels seems reasonable.
On Mar 21, 2014, at 7:05 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I don't think we're making any assumptions. We feed the coordinates to a
