hg: openjfx/2.1/master: Added build scripts that are needed for building UI controls.
igor.nekrestyanov at oracle.com
Tue Dec 6 13:04:42 PST 2011
On 12/6/11 12:39 PM, Richard Bair wrote:
>>> We use Ant for all the builds, although there is some concern about how we'll go about doing things when we get integrated into the JDK (where they use make... yikes!). We use a little make as well for building the native parts (media, webkit, glass).
>> Basically you're building one big monolitic jar. From a startup speed perspective that may not be the best choice.
> I'm not sure of the current numbers, but I know that previously we did comparisons and the monolithic jar was faster at startup (and smaller at download since we pack200 the whole thing), but that analysis may have been with WebStart (since that is how the 1.x platform shipped), and not with the installer variety. Igor do you know?
yes, for webstart based deployment single jar is clearly superior from
the startup standpoint.
I am not sure that splitting into multiple jars helps startup much
unless a lot of these jars are not used.
You mostly save on reading fewer data from zip directory but reading
multiple files may be more expensive as you do not benefit from disk
I am not sure what is current size of zip directory for jfxrt.jar but it
is likely to be couple of hundreds Kb i think.
>> Is the JDK modularization (Jigsaw) going to influence your structure?
> Definitely. From a project perspective I think we're more or less there (ie: our source "modules" already exist and are fairly well decoupled and so forth), so when Java 8 modularity is far enough along and we're past 2.2 and working on 3.0 we'll start using Java 8 modularity.
>> I think there are people enough who can, and would be willing to, help out with Maven / OSGi modularisation (since we know diddly about Jigsaw, I can't comment on that).
> That would be good!
More information about the openjfx-dev