JavaFX revisited

[vsquared]

Previously some of us had difficulty running JavaFX code. All the JavaFX modules were added to the last version of the Processing editor (version 4.3.2) so theoretically previous issues should be resolved. I'm curious if we can all now run this demo:

# Uses Imported mode for py5
import javafx.scene.Scene
import javafx.scene.layout.Pane
import javafx.stage.Stage

def settings():
    size(1,1,FX2D)
    
def setup():
    btn = javafx.scene.control.Button("Button")    
    btn.setLayoutX(80)
    btn.setLayoutY(80)
    pane = javafx.scene.layout.Pane()
    pane.getChildren().add(btn)
    scene = javafx.scene.Scene(pane, 250, 200)
    stage = javafx.stage.Stage()
    stage.setTitle("Button demo")
    stage.setScene(scene)
    stage.show()

[hx2A]

@vsquared , after the latest Processing release I downloaded it and built a dev version of py5 using the new core.jar file because I also wanted to test out FX2D. I didn't see a difference in FX2D behavior, then I looked at the code change and saw it was just for FX2D when run through the Processing PDE. Nothing about core.jar changed, so even after I do the next py5 release, FX2D will work the same as previous releases.

That doesn't mean that I am not inspired to offer better support for FX2D in py5. I'd like to see it work also, and have been looking into what needs to be done for that.

When you use FX2D in the PDE, what do you see that is different in the latest Processing release compared to previous releases?

[vsquared]

You should be able to run the demo on a mac when you have the seven javafx modules in a folder called 'jars' in the same folder as your sketch.

[vsquared]

Nothing about core.jar changed, so even after I do the next py5 release, FX2D will work the same as previous releases.

I'm sorry to hear that; things didn't work out as I had hoped. In the beginning my efforts to bring JavaFX into the Processing realm was pretty limited. The code writers included only two or three of the seven JavaFX modules so about all I could do was some basic graphics, which was one of the modules they did include. What got to me was that it was intentional; they had comments in the code stating that they wouldn't add the rest of the modules until there was some very good reason to add them. I complained about in the forum and glv told me that I could change the code in my own fork of the code and re-compile it for my own personal use, which is what I did. This allowed me to use just about any control that JavaFX had to offer, but it did me no good to post any of that in the forum because I was the only one that could run the demos. Then someone discovered that if they added the jar files to their sketch they could run the code too. But, the user had to go to the trouble of finding the jars (they are included in the Processing/libraries/javafx/library/macos-xxxx folder) and move them to their sketch folder and they had to do that every time they wanted to create a JavaFX sketch. Not too many users wanted to mess with all of that. Furthermore, with every new IDE release I had to modify the source code and re-compile it in order to keep using JavaFX. All of that occurred under Ben Fry who didn't want to add the additional modules for reasons I never understood. Apparently the leadership changed and Sable Ralph helped me issue a pull request to add the modules and they were finally added. Now in the last editor I can run my old demos without modifying the source code, with the exception of one very important demo which showed many of the JavaFX controls all in one sketch. It won't run in my last modified editor either and I haven't taken the time to track down the error message. I truly do not understand the reluctance to support JavaFX. The graphics are far superior with FX2D compared to the default renderer and the controls are a lot slicker than Swing in my opinion.

[hx2A]

What got to me was that it was intentional; they had comments in the code stating that they wouldn't add the rest of the modules until there was some very good reason to add them.

I can see how that would be frustrating. I agree that JavaFX is a good renderer and obviously a lot of work as been put into making JavaFX work with Processing. It's too bad that it doesn't get the same level of attention and support as the other renderers.

(they are included in the Processing/libraries/javafx/library/macos-xxxx folder) and move them to their sketch folder and they had to do that every time they wanted to create a JavaFX sketch. Not too many users wanted to mess with all of that.

I thought JavaFX was available through the PDE's Library Manager? When I install it through there, I am able to use JavaFX with the PDE. The stuff in the library/macos-xxxx folder is for native libraries. Processing needs to be able to find them, but I don't think you need them in the Sketch folder for that to happen.

Apparently the leadership changed and Sable Ralph helped me issue a pull request to add the modules and they were finally added

Right, they have been added. And I do want to see what else I can do to make the FX2D renderer easier to use with py5 and Processing. I am able to have conversations with Sable Ralph and other Processing contributors, and will bring up FX2D to them to see what's up.

[villares]

On Thonny with py5 0.10.4a2 I get: ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'javafx'

[vsquared]

ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'javafx'
May mean you're not using Imported mode for py5.

[villares]

May mean you're not using Imported mode for py5.

The plug-in for imported mode was on allright, I tried a few other tests, with P2D and trying to import javafx:

[vsquared]

You may not have installed the JavaFX library in Processing IDE; not sure how that would impact Thonny:

The other possibility is that there is no 'jars' folder containing the javafx modules inside of your sketchbook or the folder where the py5 sketch resides.

[villares]

I'm afraid you are right, I have not installed it at any point... When I have the time I'll see if I can have a closer look, and grab the jars from the PDE...