[brailleblaster] Re: Why Java
- From: "John J. Boyer" <john.boyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 23:23:18 -0500
Can you give me a link to download wxwidgets for C? I'm a C fan myself,
but I figured we could get the GUI faster with Java. I don't know if
this is true of Snow Leopard, but I got the C compiler and a lot of
other stuff on Leopard by installing the developer tools.
Yuemei and John Gardner must be occupied with ViewPlus work since we
haven't heard from them on this issue.
John
On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 07:45:44PM -0700, Alex Jurgensen wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> C programs run nativvely on all major OS's.
>
> WX-Widgets is like SWT for C and for sure works on the Mac with the Mac's
> screen reader.
>
> The compilers are not included on the Mac and as far as I know on Windows,
> but those need to be run only once to compile the code.
>
> What you walk away with by using C is faster exicution, and more memory
> efficient code, which is important to screen reader users running on low
> specification machines.
>
> Just my $0.02 cents worth.
>
> Regards,
> Alex,
>
>
> On 2010-11-04, at 5:57 PM, John J. Boyer wrote:
>
> > BrailleBlaster is intended as a desktop application. There is no reason
> > why it couldn't be used on a tablet. It would not be suitable for small
> > devices, such as phones, because these could not accommmodate the GUI
> > which is part of its design and a large part of its appeal. How would
> > you fit usable braille and print windows on a small screen?
> >
> > The core libraries of BrailleBlaster are already in C. liblouis and
> > liblouisutdml will be the braille engine of BrailleBlaster and they can
> > be used without it via the file2brl command-line interface. They are the
> > engine; BrailleBlaster is the rest of the car.
> >
> > Java was picked because of SWT, which has native C libraries that
> > support the UI requirements of different platforms. wxwidgets is
> > problematical. I have heard that it really works only for Windows. Java
> > provides wuicker software development and indeed a great number of
> > libraries that do things like display MathML.
> > Microsoft doesn['t provide C at the installation of its operating
> > systems. With Apple, you have to install the Developer tools to get C. I
> > think both decided that maintaining their own Java runtimes just wasn't
> > worth it, because there are so many third-party JREs already available.
> >
> > I may be wrong on some of this, but I'm hoping we will see some messages
> > from More Java experts and from other decision-makers.
> >
> > Yuemei said she is experienced mostly in C and Visual Basic. She did
> > mention Swing, but not that she had used it a lot. I think straight SWT
> > is the way to go.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 05:45:02PM -0500, qubit wrote:
> >> Perhaps because there are java libraries available that are tempting to
> >> use as a base? As for Apple and Microsoft, the java runtime is not being
> >> supported by them any longer, but third parties may still develop such
> >> support to be distributed with java programs.
> >> Any other things I have missed?
> >> --le
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Alex Jurgensen
> >> To: Brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 2:25 PM
> >> Subject: [brailleblaster] Why Java
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >>
> >> I mention this now, at the relative beginning of the project, so as to
> >> avoid unnecessary work.
> >>
> >>
> >> Why are we using Java and not writing most of the code in C, with a true,
> >> native UI on top, such as WX-Widgets for C. Because the code would not
> >> need to be exicuted in a virtual machine, we would avoid many of the
> >> slowdowns associated with Java.
> >>
> >>
> >> We must also think about embeded devices, where the overhead of Java is
> >> either too much for hte battery to tolleratte acceptably or there is no
> >> Java Virtual Machine available.
> >>
> >>
> >> Furthermore, both Microsoft and Apple have dropped support for Java
> >> within their Operating Systems, it doesn't seem to make sense to continue
> >> coding in Java because we may one day soon need to rewrite all of our code
> >> to aadapt to a whole new class of machines that don't have Java Available.
> >>
> >>
> >> I feel that if we write the core of our code into C libraries, we should
> >> be able to bring about new UI's, such as a Cocoatouch UI for IOS devices,
> >> OR an QT UI for Nokea and Intel's new project.
> >>
> >>
> >> Just my two cents.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Alex,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Alex Jurgensen,
> >> VoiceOver Trainer,
> >> ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>
> >> Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org
> >>
> >
> > --
> > John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
> > Abilitiessoft, Inc.
> > http://www.abilitiessoft.com
> > Madison, Wisconsin USA
> > Developing software for people with disabilities
> >
> >
>
> Alex Jurgensen,
> VoiceOver Trainer,
> ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org
>
--
John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
Abilitiessoft, Inc.
http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Madison, Wisconsin USA
Developing software for people with disabilities
Other related posts:
