Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36543

Re: Jigsaw

From Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Jigsaw
Date 2017-04-27 07:42 -0400
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <odsl8c$cce$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (2 earlier) <odks25$1av6$1@gioia.aioe.org> <odl2vp$1moi$1@gioia.aioe.org> <b6c08905-7e08-460f-9b04-eb287b99e84d@googlegroups.com> <odl6o3$2l1$1@dont-email.me> <odr7ei$1o5q$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Show all headers | View raw


On 4/26/2017 6:37 PM, omegajunior wrote:
> Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> Wrote in message:
>> On 4/24/2017 11:15 AM, Eric Douglas wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> The first stated goal was to scale down to fit a Java on smaller devices.  I'm not sure how much space a JRE takes up or what sort of devices you'd need to be able to fit just part of the JRE.
>>
>>       Data point: On a Windows machine, the current JRE takes 179MB.
>> Class libraries take 96MB, with 53MB devoted to rt.jar, the "core"
>> classes. Binaries take another 83MB, of which 40MB are used by
>> something called "jfxwebkit.dll" -- perhaps the way to slim down
>> Java is to ditch JavaFX!  :)
>>
> 
> JavaFX indeed is huge, and most of its standard GUI are severely
>   lacking. I've found myself adding the most basic of GUI
>   functionalities, or adding components from JFXtras
>   etc.

     If your application doesn't use FX, the FX classes and FX libraries
aren't loaded.  They'll use disk space, yes, but although the amount
would have been troublesome twenty-five years ago it doesn't come to
much nowadays.  Let's see <checks>: I can get a 2TB drive for US$63,
which is three thousandths of a cent per megabyte, so space to store
the entire JRE will set you back just over half a cent.  Even at SSD
prices (240GB for US$78) you'll need to scrounge up less than six cents.

> And yes, if your application doesn't need JavaFX, you should be
>   able to cut it out of the distribution.

     First, I'll second Arne Vajhøj's suggestion that you check the
license for any prohibitions on subsetting.  I'm not sure whether
JavaFX is yet part of the "official" Java or whether it's still
"just along for the ride," but don't rush ahead without checking.

     Second, if you can in fact purge FX and its forty or fifty MB,
be careful not to hurt your arm trying to pat yourself on the back
for saving not quite two-tenths of a cent.

-- 
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
Thirteen hundred sixty-four days to go.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Jigsaw Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-20 21:37 -0400
  Re: Jigsaw omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com> - 2017-04-24 08:45 -0400
    Re: Jigsaw Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-24 10:44 -0400
      Re: Jigsaw Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 08:15 -0700
        Re: Jigsaw Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-24 11:29 -0400
          Re: Jigsaw Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-24 11:29 -0400
          Re: Jigsaw omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com> - 2017-04-26 18:32 -0400
            Re: Jigsaw Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-26 19:49 -0400
        Re: Jigsaw Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-04-24 11:51 -0400
          Re: Jigsaw omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com> - 2017-04-26 18:37 -0400
            Re: Jigsaw Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-26 19:49 -0400
            Re: Jigsaw Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-04-27 07:42 -0400

csiph-web