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

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

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

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

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

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 >

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

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. ( >

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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 >

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

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". > >

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

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