Re: If there were a pure Java libSBML ...
18 May '09 15:08
>>>>> On 18 May 2009, Neil Swainston <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
NS> Hi Mike, Did you get convincing reasons as to why the
NS> current JNI approach is unsatisfactory?
It's mostly the expected reasons -- portability, deployment,
and Java-ishness of the API.
Since the survey is anonymous, I think it's ok to report the
specific comments about this issue here. Here they are (in
no particular order):
"The Java binding currently leads to plattform dependence
of libSBML and therefore the great advantage of the
plattform independence of Java gets lost. It would be
beneficial to have a Java implementation."
"The java API could make use of java generics instead of
having a ListOfX for every type X. For example,
List<Species> instead of ListOfSpecies."
"I know it isn't really practical at all, but I really
dislike having to install the C++ libs everywhere I want to
use the jars :)"
"Having a pure java libSBML."
To manage your libsbml-development list subscription, visit
For a web interface to the libsbml-development mailing list, visit
For questions or feedback about the libsbml-development list,