[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-openjfx-dev
Subject:    Making JavaFX Development Faster
From:       michael.heinrichs () oracle ! com (Michael Heinrichs)
Date:       2012-10-29 8:58:34
Message-ID: 82FD4F85-D5E4-4654-BE22-0E67AD0ED5A7 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Richard,

the Java Bean adapters use Cleaners to unregister themselves from the Java Bean once \
they are ready to be GCed. If necessary this can easily be rewritten to use \
finalizers instead.

- Michael


On 27.10.2012, at 15:24, Richard Bair wrote:

> I cannot imagine what internal stuff Michael could be using or when that was added. \
>  
> On Oct 26, 2012, at 7:42 AM, Tom Schindl <tom.schindl at bestsolution.at> wrote:
> 
> > Not only the memory argument is import.
> > 
> > What if a customer says i have to run on his j9-jvm?
> > 
> > I can be wrong but IIRC Michael told me at JavaOne that the properties
> > code is even using internal (sun....) stuff so even simply dropping in
> > the jar to the j9 classpath is doomed to fail.
> > 
> > And beside that using FX-Observables and e.g. JPA don't like each other
> > i guess because of all those lazy list stuff, ... .
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > Am 22.10.12 19:23, schrieb Werner Lehmann:
> > > Richard,
> > > 
> > > On 22.10.2012 17:38, Richard Bair wrote:
> > > > MyObject obj = new MyObject();
> > > > obj = BlackMagic.makeObservable(obj);
> > > 
> > > I'd like to see the implementation of BlackMagic ;-)  (cglib stuff?)
> > > 
> > > > However, the javafx beans package and collections and such are part
> > > > of the "base" module -- ie: they could be separated from the rest of
> > > > javafx and safely used on the server side or elsewhere. Why not just
> > > > use properties and such on the server side definition of classes? Or
> > > > are those classes being auto-generated and thus not taking observable
> > > > properties into account?
> > > 
> > > Currently I want to avoid requiring customers to install the FX runtime
> > > serverside. That will be a moot point with JRE 7+. Which does not help
> > > the 6.x customers, especially if they are on WebLogic which is usually
> > > tied to a specific major version.
> > > 
> > > Another aspect is the footprint regarding memory and bandwidth.
> > > Obviously a StringProperty requires more bytes than a String. This is
> > > not an issue (usually) when I want to display a relatively short list of
> > > beans in the UI. It gets noticeable when the server suddenly needs +X
> > > megabytes, the instantion of objects needs +Y ms (also affects
> > > deserialization), and sending them over the network takes +Z ms...
> > > 
> > > Werner
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t                        EDV Systemhaus GmbH
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > tom schindl                 gesch?ftsf?hrer/CEO
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > eduard-bodem-gasse 5-7/1   A-6020 innsbruck     fax      ++43 512 935833
> > http://www.BestSolution.at                      phone    ++43 512 935834


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]