What does this mean for the future of JavaFX on iOS?
Erik De Rijcke
derijcke.erik at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 18:39:03 UTC 2016
I'm currently looking if I can get some robovm fork kickstarted. (
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 executable (especially
for arm/embedded use which does not require an Oracle license) would
be *really* cool. Let's see if we can continue to make this happen in
one way or another.
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Felix Bembrick
<felix.bembrick at gmail.com> wrote:
> So what AOT will you be using now? The last RoboVM AOT or something else?
>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 03:15, Johan Vos <johan.vos at gluonhq.com> 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.
>> 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 classes that have a 1-1 mapping to native iOS classes, and a whole "Studio" allowing developers to create applications.
>> Only the AOT is relevant to us. We don't use the bindings, as we happen to have a great set of UI classes: the JavaFX platform. We don't need the studio, as we directly provide plugins for NetBeans, IntelliJ and Eclipse.
>> The idea of JavaFX is to deliver a cross-platform UI for all devices. RoboVM took a different approach, as they mainly promoted creating an iOS specific UI (using the Java bindings to the native iOS UI components) and an Android specific UI.
>> We had different views on a cross-platform UI (JavaFX) versus a platform-specific UI, but here is no doubt the RoboVM team consist of great developers and it is a real pity and shame they won't be able to continue working on their product.
>> But for JavaFX and Gluon, it doesn't make a difference.
>> - Johan
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Steve Hannah <steve at weblite.ca> wrote:
>>> According to Gluon, they're not impacted by this.
>>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Felix Bembrick <felix.bembrick at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I just read this article which states that RoboVM is effectively "shutting down".
>>>> 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 alternative technology or product that can fill this void? Or is the final nail in the coffin for JavaFX to ever be a truly viable cross platform technology?
>>> Steve Hannah
>>> Web Lite Solutions Corp.
More information about the openjfx-dev