Hi Kevin,
Please review this simple name change cleanup fix.
JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8154509
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ckyang/JDK-8154509/webrev.00/
Thanks,
- Chien
I have synced the OpenJFX changes from the just-released April 2016 CPU
release (8u91/8u92) into 8u and into 9.
Here is a webrev of the FX 8u92 changes for those who are interested in
the changes, but don't want to wade through the 52 separate changesets I
just pushed (most of which are tag or
Hi Chien,
Can you do a quick sanity test review of the backport to 8u-dev of the
following:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139326
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8139326/webrev.00/
This was earlier reviewed (by you) for 9-dev with the intent to backport
to 8u-dev, but the backport
Jim,
Please review the following fix:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153872
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8153872/webrev.00/
This is a simple backout of the earlier fix for JDK-8153754.
-- Kevin
Hi Chien,
Can you do a quick sanity test review of the backport to 8u-dev of the
following:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139326
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8139326/webrev.00/
This was earlier reviewed (by you) for 9-dev with the intent to backport
to 8u-dev, but the backport
Dave D or Alexander,
Please review the following simple fix to add a qualified export for a
class that is used by javafx.media that has moved as part of JEP-260.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152355
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8152355/webrev.00/
I verified that the IllegalAcce
I agree with you on the point that desktops are here to stay, but my point was
that if JavaFX is only ever going to viable on such desktops then it is not
cross platform because by far the biggest focus for commercial software
development companies currently is "post PC" devices like mobiles, ta
Hi Kevin, Alexander, Guru,
Please review the below patch.
JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8089842
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~arajkumar/8089842/webrev.00/
Issue: There is no way to JS character as a Java Char type.
Fix: There is no Char type in JavaScript, but we can co
The question is: How does perform JavaFX in comparison to e.g. Xamarian?
> Am 19.04.2016 um 13:14 schrieb Scott Palmer :
>
>
>> On Apr 19, 2016, at 4:18 AM, Felix Bembrick wrote:
>
>>
>> Let's face it, without highly optimised AOT, Java and/or JavaFX on mobiles
>> is simply not viable which
> On Apr 19, 2016, at 4:18 AM, Felix Bembrick wrote:
>
> Let's face it, without highly optimised AOT, Java and/or JavaFX on mobiles is
> simply not viable which in turn implies that JavaFX itself is not even worth
> looking at... RIP.
Let's not go crazy. JavaFX is still the best bet for desk
Hi Phil,
Please see my update in jbs:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150076
Thanks,
Mikhail.
On 4/14/2016 12:28 AM, Phil Race wrote:
I have an old PageRange printing test where I set
settings.setPageRanges(new
PageRange(1,3));
and it prints fine on
Well I did ask Johan what AOT they are going to use instead of RoboVM but there
has not be a response yet.
Let's face it, without highly optimised AOT, Java and/or JavaFX on mobiles is
simply not viable which in turn implies that JavaFX itself is not even worth
looking at... RIP.
But I take Jo
Hi,
in my opinion the abandonment of RoboVM is a very big step back for Java on
Mobile because there is NO real alternative to RoboVM. So it has definitely a
big impact on Gluon and JavaFX on Mobile. Gluon uses RoboVM 1.8 - and old
version of RoboVM which will be not developed anymore. So no se
13 matches
Mail list logo
