The CMake support feature does not have to exist to replace Projucer as a fully automatic application generation mechanism.
Juce it android#
For better Android support, people should migrate to CMake's model and it should be (made) possible, so that normal Android app developers can make desired changes at their own will. I don't believe that generating everything via a tool like Projucer is great either. But it is unlikely to happen, as it didn't happen for CMake support. If the JUCE team were of plentiful Android development experts who can keep up with the latest Android development trends and implement proper project model generation in Projucer, that would be nice.
("How can I add new element which is new in Android 11?") It's hard to make desired changes to manifest, build scripts etc. The project generated by Projucer is unnatural, old-fashioned, and falls into anti-patterns in some parts.
Juce it for android#
But it is better for Android application developers to be able to adjust these items on their own, so that the code can stay more straightforward, maintainable, and in higher quality. In Projucer-generated Android applications, various information in AndroidManifest.xml and adle are the customizible properties defined in Projucer's AndroidExporter. The JUCE application part will be a natively coded application using the Android NDK, and the Projucer-generated project renders the UI on JUCE's own View using native code, and interoperates UI events between the Android framework and the app native code. App developers can launch Android Studio from Projucer, and there is a debuggable application opened at ready state. It generates Gradle projects for Android applications that can be then built on and launched from Android Studio. MissionsĪs of the January 2021 release of JUCE 6.0.6, Android is only supported via Projucer. Win/Mac/Linux/iOS are not CMake native build environments, while supported in JUCE, Android, which supports CMake as a native build environment, is somehow not supported. You might say "huh?" - CMake has been supported by Android Studio for a long time, and it should be the best platform that would benefit at most. JUCE6 supports CMake, but there is one missing platform: Android. 100MB of extra RAM on the desktop… that doesn’t really seem like a huge issue IMHO.(This is a translation from my Japanese blog post) So far, I see mobile as being the real PITA of this approach. So “why not” explore that option? That’s what I am trying to determine in this thread.
Simply put, I feel like I am spending way too much time building my UI, than I should.Ĭorrect me if I’m wrong, but the way I see it is - web UI can look just as good, can be just as performant animation/transition-wise (you can use Canvas or WebGL or even SVG, which is fully supported in the browser) and development time is cut by a significant amount. But at the same time I can’t really say UI is its strong suit. etc.ĭon’t get me wrong, I love JUCE - it solves a huge amount of problems for me and it’s well written and supported. And there are many more (and bigger) reasons - styling (although it has it’s caveats), CSS is so much more flexible and easier than the LookAndFeel approach connecting models and views is a lot more advanced in most web UI frameworks than what we have in JUCE (MVC and MVVM are ubiquitous within the web UI -> in JUCE some controls have attachments…) etc. Yesterday I read a pretty extensive topic here on the forum why can’t a bouncing ball be animated with JUCE. While I enjoy having control, I definitely do not enjoy having to worry about the low-level rendering of my fonts. Don’t know why anyone would choose to build a desktop UI with web tools
0 kommentar(er)
