[brailleblaster] Re: Why Java
- From: Alex Jurgensen <asquared21@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 21:55:06 -0700
Hi John,
You only need the developer tools to develope the software. You need nothing to
run stand-alone apps.
On Snow Leopard, there is the same developer tools and a new preview of XCode 4
is available to those in the Mac program, I believe, according to
http://developer.apple.com/ . I am not a developer registered with Apple, so I
can't confirm this.
The link to WXC is: http://wxc.sourceforge.net/ .
Regards,
Alex,
On 2010-11-04, at 9:23 PM, John J. Boyer wrote:
> 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
>
>
Alex Jurgensen,
VoiceOver Trainer,
ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org
Other related posts:
