openjdk-jfx VS JDK

Checking this out: the big new thing in Java 9 was modules. These are implemented using module-info.java source files that contain the module definitions.The oldest source code for JavaFX that I have been able to find is version 11 here and it contains multiple module-info.java files. Clearly it expects Version 9 module support.

Unrelated but https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/217 shows that you can pass in the GTK version to use by passing e.g. -Djdk.gtk.version=2 to java.

Nothing against the developers but JavaFx development definitely hasn't set their priorities right. It seems to be all about gamey stuff which makes nice blog posts, but I'd bet that 95% of deployment is in the business app sector. And UI elements there aren't well supported. Let's talk about the very core of every business app, the TableView which in comparison to JTable shows catastrophic performance problems, and tickets filed against ist live forever. Examples: * https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/409 * https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/481

JavaFX's font rendering is busted on macOS since 2018:

https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/229#issuec...

I felt out of the loop, thinking that Zero VM was some kind of new distro for OpenJDK but chasing <https://packages.debian.org/sid/openjdk-22-jre-zero#:~:text=...> to <https://sources.debian.org/src/openjdk-11/11.0.23%2B9-1/debi...> lead me to https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/tree/jdk-22-ga/src/hotspot/cp...

It seems that it's a specific CPU target for the Hotspot JIT for non-mainstream architectures (or for research purposes, as I saw mentioned once)

Completely gutted from the OpenJDK, last I checked. See here for the culprit PR: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/18688

> Yes, they're changing one aspect of signal handler use to work around this problem. They're not stopping the use of signal handlers in general. Hotspot continues to use signals for efficiency in general. See https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476...

This whole thread is about SIGSEGV, and specifically their SIGSEGV handling. However, catching normal signals is not about efficiency.

Some of their exception handling is still odd: There is no reason for a program that receives SIGILL to ever attempt continuing. But others is fine, like catching SIGFPE to just forward an exception to the calling code.

(Sure, you could construct an argument to say that this is for efficiency if you considered the alternative to be implementing floating point in software so that all exceptions exist in user-space, but hardware floating point is the norm and such alternative would be wholly unreasonable.)

> The wonderful thing about choosing not to care about facts is having whatever opinions you want.

I appreciate the irony of you making such statement, proudly thinking that your opinion equals fact, and therefore any other opinion is not.

This discussion is nothing but subjective opinion vs. subjective opinion. Facts are (hopefully, as I can only speak for myself) inputs to both our opinions, but no opinion about "good" or "bad", "nasty" or not can ever be objective. Objective code quality does not exist.

I remember talking to Brendan about the PreserveFramePointer patch during my first months at Netflix in 2015. As of JDK 21, unfortunately it is no longer a general purpose solution for the JVM, because it prevents a fast path being taken for stack thawing for virtual threads: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/d32ce65781c1d7815a69ceac...

Map doesn't implement the Collection interface.

https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/java.base/sha...