Forums

>>>>> On 18 May 2009, Neil Swainston <neil.swainston@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
NS> Hi Mike, Did you get convincing reasons as to why the
NS> current JNI approach is unsatisfactory?

Hi Neil,

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."

MH

____________________________________________________________
To manage your libsbml-development list subscription, visit
https://utils.its.caltech.edu/mailman/listinfo/libsbml-development

For a web interface to the libsbml-development mailing list, visit
http://sbml.org/Forums/

For questions or feedback about the libsbml-development list,
contact sbml-team@caltech.edu