SwingNode doesn't respond to Swing component resize?

[Brian Bolstad]

Hello everyone,

In the SwingNode#resize(double, double) documentation, it states:

"Applications should not invoke this method directly. If an application needs 
to directly set the size of the SwingNode, it should set the Swing component's 
minimum/preferred/maximum size constraints which will be propagated 
correspondingly to the SwingNode and it's parent will honor those settings 
during layout."

However, I'm not seeing this behavior-the SwingNode doesn't resize for me 
unless I remove and re-add the Swing component to the SwingNode after resizing.

In the implementation, the private class SwingNodeContent has methods like 
preferredSizeChanged that I assume should be called when the Swing component 
size constraints are modified.  However, it looks to me like JLightweightFrame 
only installs pref/max/min size property change listeners on components added 
after the first one.  So, SwingNode never gets notified of the size changes and 
never updates it's cached values for the swing component's sizes and never 
updates its layoutBounds.

Below is a sample that demonstrates the problem I'm seeing; if you click the 
button, it will double its size, but the enclosing SwingNode doesn't change 
size.  I'm running JavaFX 8u66 on Windows 10.

I'm very new to JavaFX, so what am I doing wrong?

Thanks,
BB

import javafx.application.Application;
import javafx.embed.swing.SwingNode;
import javafx.scene.Scene;
import javafx.scene.layout.StackPane;
import javafx.scene.paint.Color;
import javafx.scene.shape.Rectangle;
import javafx.stage.Stage;

import javax.swing.*;
import java.awt.*;

public class SwingNodeResize extends Application
{
@Override
public void start(Stage primaryStage)
{
SwingNode swingNode = new SwingNode();

init(swingNode);

StackPane root = new StackPane(new Rectangle(500, 500, Color.RED), 
swingNode);
Scene scene = new Scene(root);

primaryStage.setTitle("SwingNode Resize");
primaryStage.setScene(scene);
primaryStage.show();
}

private void init(final SwingNode node)
{
SwingUtilities.invokeLater(() ->
{
JButton button = new JButton("Click me!");
button.addActionListener(event ->
{
Dimension buttonSize = button.getSize();
buttonSize.setSize(buttonSize.getWidth() * 2, 
buttonSize.getHeight() * 2);

button.setPreferredSize(buttonSize);
button.setMinimumSize(buttonSize);
button.setMaximumSize(buttonSize);
button.setSize(buttonSize);

System.out.println("Button size: " + button.getPreferredSize() 
+ "; " +
   "SwingNode size: " + new Dimension((int) 
node.prefWidth(-1), (int) node.prefHeight(-1)));
});

node.setContent(button);
});
}

public static void main(String[] args)
{
launch(args);
}
}

9-dev unlocked following sanity testing

[Kevin Rushforth]

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Sven Reimers]

Seems there are more forks out there..

https://github.com/bugvm/bugvm

Sven

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Felix Bembrick 
wrote:

> 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 
> 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
> >  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  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 
> 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.
> >>>
>



-- 
Sven Reimers

* Senior Expert Software Architect
* Java Champion
* NetBeans Dream Team Member: http://dreamteam.netbeans.org
* Community Leader  NetBeans: http://community.java.net/netbeans
  Desktop Java:
http://community.java.net/javadesktop
* JUG Leader JUG Bodensee: http://www.jug-bodensee.de
* Duke's Choice Award Winner 2009
* Blog: https://www.java.net//blog/sven

* XING: https://www.xing.com/profile/Sven_Reimers8
* LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/svenreimers

Join the NetBeans Groups:
* XING: http://www.xing.com/group-20148.82db20
* NUGM: http://haug-server.dyndns.org/display/NUGM/Home
* LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1860468
   http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=107402
   http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=1684717
* Oracle: https://mix.oracle.com/groups/18497

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

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  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
>  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  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  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 
>  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.
>>> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Erik De Rijcke]

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
 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  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  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  
 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.
>>

RFR[9] XS: 8067648: We can not see any radio buttons in Node Properties demo

[Morris Meyer]

David and Kevin,

Please review this comment change to Ensemble8.  I could not find any of 
the PlaygroundProperties for radio buttons in NodePropertiesApp in 8u or 
9-dev.


Thanks,

--morris

BUG - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8087648
WEBREV - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~morris/JDK-8067648.01/

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

I wonder what the performance of alternatives to RoboVM is like...

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:09, Steve Hannah  wrote:
> 
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784242565357568
> 
> The Gluon blog post from a few months ago (when @robovm was acquired by
>> @xamarin) is still almost entirely relevant
>> http://gluonhq.com/gluon-supports-multiple-jvms/
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Felix Bembrick 
> wrote:
> 
>> So what do they use instead?
>> 
>>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  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,
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784242565357568
> 
> The Gluon blog post from a few months ago (when @robovm was acquired by
>> @xamarin) is still almost entirely relevant
>> http://gluonhq.com/gluon-supports-multiple-jvms/
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Felix Bembrick 
> wrote:
> 
>> So what do they use instead?
>> 
>>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  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.
>>> 
>>> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
>>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>> 
>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by
>> this.=
>>> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041";>
>> https://t=
>>> witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>> >> iv>> class=3D"gmail_quote=
>>> ">On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick > dir=3D"ltr"><>> href=3D"mailto:felix.bembr...@gmail.com";
>> target=3D"_blank">felix.bembrick@g=
>>> mail.com> wrote:> style=
>>> =3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I
>> just r=
>>> ead this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting
>> dow=
>>> n".
>>> 
>>> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/";
>> rel=3D"noreferrer" =
>>> target=3D"_blank">https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
>>> 
>>> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
>> Jav=
>>> aFX 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 i=
>>> s the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable
>> cross p=
>>> latform technology?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Felix-- > cl=
>>> ass=3D"gmail_signature">Steve HannahWeb Lite Solutions
>> Corp.>> v>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17--
>>> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
>>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>> 
>>> According t

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

So what AOT will you be using now? The last RoboVM AOT or something else?

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:15, Johan Vos  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  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  
>>> 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.
> 

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Johan Vos]

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  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 
> 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.
>

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Steve Hannah]

https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784242565357568

The Gluon blog post from a few months ago (when @robovm was acquired by
> @xamarin) is still almost entirely relevant
> http://gluonhq.com/gluon-supports-multiple-jvms/


On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Felix Bembrick 
wrote:

> So what do they use instead?
>
> > On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  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.
> >
> > --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> > Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >
> > According to Gluon, they're not impacted by
> this.=
> > https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041";>
> https://t=
> > witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>  > iv> class=3D"gmail_quote=
> > ">On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick  dir=3D"ltr">< > href=3D"mailto:felix.bembr...@gmail.com";
> target=3D"_blank">felix.bembrick@g=
> > mail.com> wrote: style=
> > =3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I
> just r=
> > ead this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting
> dow=
> > n".
> > 
> > https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/";
> rel=3D"noreferrer" =
> > target=3D"_blank">https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> > 
> > Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
> Jav=
> > aFX 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 i=
> > s the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable
> cross p=
> > latform technology?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Felix--  cl=
> > ass=3D"gmail_signature">Steve HannahWeb Lite Solutions
> Corp. > v>
> > 
> >
> > --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17--
> > --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> > Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >
> > According to Gluon, they're not impacted by
> this.=
> > https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041";>
> https://t=
> > witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041
>  > iv> class=3D"gmail_quote=
> > ">On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick  dir=3D"ltr">< > href=3D"mailto:felix.bembr...@gmail.com";
> target=3D"_blank">felix.bembrick@g=
> > mail.com> wrote: style=
> > =3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I
> just r=
> > ead this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting
> dow=
> > n".
> > 
> > https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/";
> rel=3D"noreferrer" =
> > target=3D"_blank">https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> > 
> > Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making
> Jav=
> > aFX 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 i=
> > s the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable
> cross p=
> > latform technology?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Felix--  cl=
> > ass=3D"gmail_signature">Steve HannahWeb Lite Solutions
> Corp. > v>
> > 
> >
> > --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17--
>



-- 
Steve Hannah
Web Lite Solutions Corp.

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

So what do they use instead?

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 02:52, Steve Hannah  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 
> 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.
> 
> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.=
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041";>https://t=
> witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041 iv> ">On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick < href=3D"mailto:felix.bembr...@gmail.com"; target=3D"_blank">felix.bembrick@g=
> mail.com> wrote: =3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I just r=
> ead this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting dow=
> n".
> 
> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/"; rel=3D"noreferrer" =
> target=3D"_blank">https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> 
> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making Jav=
> aFX 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 i=
> s the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross p=
> latform technology?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Felix--  ass=3D"gmail_signature">Steve HannahWeb Lite Solutions Corp. v>
> 
> 
> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17--
> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> 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 
> 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.
> 
> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.=
> https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041";>https://t=
> witter.com/GluonHQ/status/721784161728471041 iv> ">On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick < href=3D"mailto:felix.bembr...@gmail.com"; target=3D"_blank">felix.bembrick@g=
> mail.com> wrote: =3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I just r=
> ead this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting dow=
> n".
> 
> https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/"; rel=3D"noreferrer" =
> target=3D"_blank">https://www.voxxed.com/blog/2016/04/robovm/
> 
> Given that they seem to be a critical part of the puzzle that is making Jav=
> aFX 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 i=
> s the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross p=
> latform technology?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Felix--  ass=3D"gmail_signature">Steve HannahWeb Lite Solutions Corp. v>
> 
> 
> --94eb2c0561622831410530c52f17--

Re: What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Steve Hannah]

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 
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.

What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?

[Felix Bembrick]

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

Re: Jvm crash: es2 pipeline crashs jvm on macosx vm

[Chien Yang]

Hi Ali,

Context management is tightly couple between Glass and Prism. The fix 
will likely touches both places.


- Chien

On 4/16/16, 11:05 AM, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:

Hi,

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Chien Yang > wrote:


Hi Ali,

Thanks! I believe we have enough information from what you have
already shared here and in JI-9035391. You can track the progress
of this issue with JI-9035391 when it is transferred to JBS.

But JI-9035391 is relate to Prism software pipeline error that happens 
in glass native code. I think these are separate issues.


--

Best Regards,
Ali Ebrahimi