JavaFX support?

I see F3 has been rebranded JavaFX and launched at JavaOne today... any
plans for a JavaFX language module for IDEA?

Mark

16 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Well, that was quick.

I did look into JavaFX, and my quick reaction is that support would be about as tough a total job as JavaScript support (unless you want the GUI Builder to create JavaFX code, in which case it's much tougher). It's not like Guice, where a third-party can turn around preliminary support quickly. To do JavaFX right will either take a large third-party multiple months, or require JetBrains support.

--Dave Griffith

0
Comment actions Permalink

I expected as much - I knew it wouldn't be a small feat but who knows what secrets are kept behind closed JetBrains doors ;)

0
Comment actions Permalink

Are people seriously interested in F3 (I refuse to call it JavaFX, it's not
Java, for dang's sake)?

I'd much rather see JetBrains focus on a better core IDEA than to support
yet another new technology created just to be different.

;ted

"Mark Derricutt" <mark@talios.com> wrote in message
news:f1qv92$58g$1@is.intellij.net...
>I see F3 has been rebranded JavaFX and launched at JavaOne today... any
>plans for a JavaFX language module for IDEA?
>

Mark



0
Comment actions Permalink

Just to be hip.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Agree on the focus on core features.
Also, we now have plugins for groovy, scala, php and ruby - all of which are not really in production quality state last time I looked.
Maybe I am just spoiled by Idea's Java support and now refuse to take anything less.

0
Comment actions Permalink

If JavaFX is really a solid alternative to the sordid state of JSP + AJAX + JavaScript then I'd say it is an important new tool that many will quickly want to embrace (including dang) and not just something else new or hip. Supporting it quickly at Intellij standards could likely end up being a key product differentiator for IDEA. Of course, being able to predicate the adoption rate (and separating the hype from the actual helpfulness) might be tricky, although on the surface, at least, the appeal of JavaFX is obvious.

0
Comment actions Permalink


This is the most useless stillborn technology I've ever seen.
It even beats the VB disaster from last year.

But then, this is Sun we're talking about.


0
Comment actions Permalink

You could at least wait a few weeks after announcement... I asume you had
your hands dirty with F3?

This is the most useless stillborn technology I've ever seen. It even
beats the VB disaster from last year.

But then, this is Sun we're talking about.



0
Comment actions Permalink

Hello Dave,

I did look into JavaFX, and my quick reaction is that support would be
about as tough a total job as JavaScript support (unless you want the
GUI Builder to create JavaFX code, in which case it's much tougher).
It's not like Guice, where a third-party can turn around preliminary
support quickly. To do JavaFX right will either take a large
third-party multiple months, or require JetBrains support.


As far as I understand, from the technical point of view, it would be hard
to start any kind of work before either a language spec or the implementation
source code is available. The documentation available now hardly qualifies
as a spec.

Don't know anything about the business point of view, though.

--
Dmitry Jemerov
Software Developer
JetBrains, Inc.
http://www.jetbrains.com/
"Develop with Pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

It doesn't fill me with confidence either.

I hope JetBrains hangs back on supporting it for the time being at least.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Code completion
Live compilation
Code Navigation
Debugging
Refactors
Code inspections
And all the other goodies that we take for granted like
Code folding
Auto formating
Syntax highlighting
Live template
...

We are so SPOILED.
We wont take anything less.
What is interesting with JavaFX script is that it have the potential of this ALL because it is a STATICALLY typed language. It is just that it take organization and a fleet of developers to make them all up (smell like money isnt it). The actual plugins of Eclipse and Netbeans dont have all the tools mentionned yet even if they are theorically possible. Neither does FlexBuilder2 for Flex and its ActionScript. Maybe the days of things like Jetbrains MPS will come and will make all these tools a reality for the smaller languages. If they are statically typed of course :p . Code completion and Live compilation (or simply compilation) for language like Javascript will never work as much as it does with c# or java. It is just theorically impossible dependless of how hard people work on it.

And please, dont tell me that compilation is complicated.
Anyway, I am out of scope now.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I really like JavaFX. And it is designed to be (in theory) IDE friendly. I just created the same application twice - as an experiment. Once in Groovy and once in JavaFX. The JavaFX version is much shorter and more elegant. And, even with no IntelliiJ support, I found it a real pleasure.

I wonder how many of you that are critical have actually taken the time to understand it. I have to admit, my first reaction was: "oh no, not another scripting language!" But, after digging a bit deeper I have really grown to respect it.

Anyway, I vote for an IntelliJ plugin.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Agree.
This technology can simplify the development. I'm developing dynamic web sites now, and i use javascript, ajax, jsf too. it's too complicated. the javaFX can simplify this. small elegant coding technology targeting the GUI.

an intellij plugin would be wonderfull! :)

0
Comment actions Permalink

It's only in its very beginning and I don't know yet how far we'll go with it, but at least it's a beginning: http://plugins.intellij.net/plugin/?id=1522

0
Comment actions Permalink

WOW!

i will try it, thanks...

0
Comment actions Permalink

i'm using javafx now in a webportal project.

WOW, it's realy great in UI programming (easy-to-use, nice effects, etc.)

i really apreciate some advanced plugin support. now i have to use netbeans for the gui package's development...

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.