Review Request: 8001533: Java launcher must launch JavaFX applications

Mandy Chung mandy.chung at
Fri Nov 16 02:42:19 UTC 2012

On 11/15/2012 5:01 PM, David DeHaven wrote:
>>     L428-430: is this fallback needed?  Would it be better
>>     if LauncherHelper.getApplicationClass() always returns
>>     a non-null class if the mainClass has been loaded successfully.
>>     Looks like this is the case in your implementation.
> Good point, the helper would have aborted by that point. How about I change to NULL_CHECK(appClass) just for safety's sake?

Sounds good to me.

>>    The change looks okay to me and I can't spot anything wrong there.
>>    L496-517 somewhat duplicates the logic added for FX in the
>>    getMainClassFromJar method.  Have you considered some refactoring
>>    work you could do to simplify the fix since I think once you get
>>    the classname of the entry point (either from a JAR or command-line
>>    and with and without the static void main method), the logic is
>>    essentially the same.  To elaborate, I see that FXHelper.launchName
>>    L707-725 is needed mainly to give a useful error message.  When
>>    you find the classname of the entry point, perhaps you can load
>>    the class and catch any linkage error and determine if it's caused
>>    by the absence of FX runtime and output an appropriate error.
>>    If the main class is successfully loaded, then proceed with
>>    L496-517 (or something like that).  Just an idea you can explore.
> Yes, I do feel that especially in the -jar case there is some repetition. The trouble is the ambiguity of ClassNotFoundException.
> I'll poke at it and see what I can come up with.

That's good.

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list