Monocle as a replacement
kevin.rushforth at oracle.com
Wed Feb 19 01:16:51 UTC 2020
OK. FWIW, proper headless support, along the lines of AWT's headless
mode, would be a very useful enhancement to JavaFX. I suspect that
Monocle, at least in its current form, is not entirely suitable, at
least not without some refactoring.
On 2/18/2020 3:54 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote:
> Thanks. I'm working with Gluon (commercially) to see if changing that
> moving forward is possible, I'll focus my energy over there.
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 6:49 PM Kevin Rushforth
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com <mailto:kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>> wrote:
> For desktop platforms, Monocle is only used as a testing
> framework. It
> isn't really suitable for proper headless support (as I guess you
> noticed), and isn't shipped on desktop platforms with the release.
> -- Kevin
> On 2/17/2020 11:12 AM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'm the developer of a printing plugin which leverages JavaFX
> for a few
> > HTML functions.
> > One of our functions would greatly benefit from being "headless
> (or more
> > accurately, "silent") mode that Monocle offers and I'm
> evaluating the use
> > of Monocle on (non-headless) Desktops for this. I'm currently
> testing a
> > monocle build by the TestFX team for MacOS.
> > Although first test was positive, when invoking multiple times,
> I'm getting
> > some internal errors similar to this:
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49388497
> and the framework grows slower
> > and slower as it nears its final capture. (I'm using
> > Is this the right place for such as discussion? Where's the best
> place to
> > ask about issues with Monocle?
> > - Tres.Finocchiaro at gmail.com <mailto:Tres.Finocchiaro at gmail.com>
More information about the openjfx-dev