« I Hear Voices: James Gosling on JavaFX | Main | New JavaFX Book Available - from Author Ralph Steyer »

January 04, 2008


Andres Almiray

Thanks for the explanation Jim, believe when I say I'd like to see jfx reach its full potential, right now it seems to me it is still in the pupae stage, I want to see the tools! =) The recent keyframe/time upgrades are great and I look forward to see more info on animations and custom extensions.

On the other hand GraphicsBuilder is also in its pupae stage, I'd like to finish static effects before focusing in serious tool support, and who knows perhaps a jfx/gfx translator which works both ways.


Jim Weaver

Good to hear from you again, Andres. There have been some changes, but the compiler team has been very careful to keep the language simple and elegant. The declarative parts of the language and UI have had very few changes, and the classes/functions side of it has in my opinion been simplified. For example, operations and functions have been combined into just functions. Also, "if/else" used to have two forms of syntax: one for statements and one that replaces the ternary if-then-else operator. Another simplification is the fact that triggers and initialization now are located where the attribute is declared. Part of your perception may be a side-effect of my focusing on things that have changed, and on things like closures and block expressions.

By the way, I've been enjoying your http://www.jroller.com/aalmiray/ blog, and am looking forward to the day that JavaFX Script has a graphics builder as cool as the one for Groovy that you've been focusing on!

Thanks Andres,
Jim Weaver.

Andres Almiray

Jim, I've been following your blog for quite a while, so I'm a bit sad to say that it looks like F3 has endured a mutation (note I don't mean evolution) from a Ruby/Python easy-to-learn language to a preview of what may be jdk7 since it was rebranded to JavaFX Script, or am I missing something?

The comments to this entry are closed.