FEB
28
2001

Java Mania: An Interview With Richard Dale

One of the most fascinating aspects of KDE is the speed with which new developments
occur after each release. KDE 2.1 came out yesterday, and was celebrated in
the traditional manner by adding lots of new features to the KDE development tree
in CVS. For me, one of the most exciting things to arrive was a very large commit
to the kdebindings
module (used for bindings between KDE's C++ code and other programing languages)
which added bindings for the KDE and Qt libraries to the well known Java
language. The author of the code, Richard Dale, has kindly agreed to answer
some questions so that readers of the Dot can get up to speed with this new
addition to KDE.

1. What do QtJava and KDEJava actually do?

They wrap most of the classes in Qt and KDE so that they can be used to write
Java programs, which look and behave identically to a C++ version. The Qt date,
time, string and list classes are replaced with their Java equivalents.

2. What would you say are the best features of the binding?

It uses KDOC as the parser engine, so it has access to the documentation comments of
the KDE methods. It translates these comments into Javadoc format, and has a go
at translating the code snippets into 'cod java' - ie C++ with those funny symbols
like '&', '*', '::' (that you never quite mastered ;-) ) replaced with java
style '.'s.

3. What made you decide to write this, and how long did it take?

I wrote some code to patch KDevelop and KDOC 1.0 to use Objective-C for gnustep
development in late 1999. After I'd done that, someone posted a question to
comp.lang.objective-c asking about whether there were any Objective-C bindings
for Qt. I thought that if I could do some bindings, I'd have a really nice complete
Objective-C programming environment.

I started using Roberto Alsina's QtC for the C bindings and shell scripts for
the Objective-C side (you can't call C++ directly from Objective-C, so you have
to do two sets of bindings). I completed a prototype version good enough to
run Qt Scribble in Objective-C in about 3 months. But the work was very labour
intensive and I couldn't see how I could manage to get the whole Qt/KDE api
done.

I wrote a patch to add Objective-C support to kdoc 2.0, so I got familiar with
the Perl code. Mathieu Chouinard emailed me asking
about how work on the Objective-C bindings was going. I told him I'd started
to hack Roberto's Python scripts, but it was still taking a lot of work to get
anything wrapped. Then it occured to me that it would be easier to make KDOC
generate the same code as the python stuff, than it would be to make the Python
parse as well as KDOC. After two months (less time than the prototype took),
we had two KDOC-based converters, for C and Objective-C, for Qt 2.2 wrapped and
working, and I was about to start on KDE 2.0.

But once I realised I could the same thing for Java/JNI at the end of October
or so, I just downed tools on Objective-C and ran for it. Er.. 24 by 7. I haven't
still been programming when the birds start singing since late 1988 or so! I
got Qt 2.2 done before Christmas, then had six weeks off starting again in February.
So KDE 2.0 has taken a bit less than a month to get this far.

Probably about a man year of 40 hour weeks for C/Objective-C/Java in total.

4. Who do you think will find this code most useful?

One group might be those people who would like to write apps with full Qt or
KDE look and feel, but prefer to code in Java over C++ (because it's quicker).
Another group might be those taking existing Java code and wrapping it to get
a fully functional KDE app. A third group might use the Qt side to write apps
which will run cross-platform, both on standard Wintel PC's (a port to Windows
should be straightforward) and Linux, *BSD, etc.

5. How much of the Qt and KDE APIs have you covered?

280 Qt classes and over 400 KDE classes - pretty complete.

6. How hard do you think it will be to extend the binding to cover the new
features in KDE 2.1?

The manual edits applied to get the bindings working are in the form of a
patch. So the KDE 2.1 headers need to be put through the converter, then the
patch applied. Finally, the diffs added to the KDE CVS since the initial check-in
must be applied, and any essential new 2.1 classes added to the project.

7. How does the signal/slot mechanism of Qt translate into Java?

Here is an example of how to connect a signal to a slot in QtJava:

QObject.connect( _colormenu,
SIGNAL( "activated( int )" ),
this,
SLOT( "slotColorMenu( int )" ) );

If the underlying C++ instance of '_colormenu' has an 'activated(int)' signal,
the Java slot is connected to that. Otherwise, the runtime assumes that you
want to connect to a Java signal and it connects the slot to that instead.

Emitting a signal looks like this:

emit("colorChanged", darkGreen());

8. How does this compare with AWT and Swing?

A very interesting question! I've never done any AWT or Swing programming (my
background is Objective-C with NeXTSTEP). It doesn't appeal to me because the
subclassing and managment of event listeners looks clunky and doesn't make use
of Java's dynamic runtime. Swing code appears to need 5 times as many classes
and twice the bulk, yet offers less functionality, compared to Apple's
Cocoa or Trolltech's Qt.

9. How hard is it for developers to add Java support for their own Qt widgets?

The KDOC converter is included in the Koala KDE bindings project, so they can
run their widget headers through that and convert them. One day per widget or
so would be my estimate

10. Could this code be used to embed Java code in a C++ KDE application?

Yes, you can mix C++ and Java. The objects don't always have to be instantiated
from within the Java environment. If you allocate an object instance on the
C++ side, and then you refer to it from within Java, a Java version is created
automatically. However, when the Java version is subsequently garbage collected, the
C++ instance isn't freed by the Java runtime. It would still exist over in the
C++ environment.

However, if you instantiate an instance on the Java side with a 'new' command
then the C++ is freed on Java garbarge collection.

11. Where do you plan to go from here?

I plan to finish the Objective-C and C bindings for KDE, finish adding Objective-C and
Java support to KDevelop 2.0 and contribute bug fixes/enhancements to the code
just released.

12. Is there anything else you'd like to say?

I haven't given the KDOC author a namecheck - which I think he
deserves. So a big hand to Sirtaj Singh Kang from me
is deserved. Also I forgot to mention there is a patch to the Qt Designer
uic tool to generate Java from exactly the same .ui files as C++.

I'd like to thank Richard for creating this cool new binding,
and for finding the time to answer my questions. You can get the code
by checking out the
kdebindings module
from the CVS; it's not included in the packages
for KDE 2.1 because it's so new. I have added some information to the
Java language bindings
section of the developer site, including an example of using the
bindings for people to have a look at. People interested in using
Java with KDE might want to join the
kde-java mailing list.

Comments

Way too cool!

Congratulations Richard! I knew that week I once spent on QtC would be useful somehow even if only as inspiration to a much better idea :-)

Actually, if you think about it, this work you did is most of the work to bind ANY language to Qt and KDE.

Once the C binding is good, any language can bind to it easily.

And if your language supports binding to C++, then you can do a direct one.

Come on Pascal/Ruby/Sather guys, have fun! :-)


By Roberto Alsina at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

Well, with Kylix on the very verge of actual distribution, that sounds pretty interesting ... because Linux will get an awfull large number of new programmers anxious to port their code and relate to the new environment


By bPoterie at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

Thanks Roberto - your QtC stuff was the start point - it would have been very difficult to get going without it,as I didn't know anything about Qt programming at first.

-- Richard


By Richard Dale at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Well, QtC was described by someone whose coding I respect as "an incredibly ugly abortion that should never have happened", so I hope you didn't take the code in it too seriously ;-)


By Roberto Alsina at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Well - you could use similar language to describe my perl! As long as the api you generate is pretty, perhaps it doesn't matter if the 'scaffolding' is a bit scruffy.

-- Richard


By Richard Dale at Fri, 2001/03/02 - 6:00am

So as I understand it, QtC is completely dead now? The last checkin, according to cvsweb, was 3 years ago... so, i doubt it will even build?


By dimator at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

QtC pretty much was born dead :-)

I am pretty sure that the current sources could almost build, as soon as you take care of all the QString strangeness (it's Qt 1.33 code ;-)

I really wanted to keep it up to date, but noone seemed to actually want to CODE using it (I got perhaps 3 mails in 3 years :-)

So, I let it rot as a proof of concept.

Then came Richard, and the rest is history, since a good QtC (the name is cool, please keep it ;-) should be now easier than ever.


By Roberto Alsina at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

But 'Son of QtC' is going well, but isn't quite ready for the KDE cvs yet. I can send a version of C bindings for Qt 2.2 as a 800k email attachment if anyone is interested. I'll wait to see how much bug fixing etc needs to be done with the Java, then if that seems stable, I'll start on the C/Objective-C again.

-- Richard


By Richard Dale at Fri, 2001/03/02 - 6:00am

So when gcj matures, we'll be able to write natively compiled kde apps in java? VERY cool! While it may not be as capable as C++, java is a lot of fun to code (imho, of course). Funny thing is, I'm currently taking a java class and an intel assembly class (definitely two extremes), and I enjoy them both more than C++. I have my reasons, most of which amount to personal preference, so I won't start a language war ;) Besides, I would enjoy coding C++ if I had nothing else, and I certainly enjoy it more than C. I should shut up and put on my flamesuit :)

Seriously though, KDE2 + Qt + gcj would be amazing!


By kdeFan at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

JNI wrapper of Qt would be about 10 times cooler.


By Anonymous at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

The bindings use lots of JNI, and JNI is good.


By Richard Dale at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

The developer site seems to having trouble (a result of the number of people downloading 2.1), but you can still see the docs I referenced via CVS. If you don't have CVS access then you can use the webcvs to view them.

You can also use this interface to look at the files in the kdebindings module itself it you like.


By Richard Moore at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

I'm sure Java is a great language and Qt and KDE are great libraries, but why would you want to write nonportabe KDE apps in java when you can write completely portable apps in swing. This is a thing that java was meant to get rid of. I can't think of the word that describes something like making non-portable java?


By John at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

Think of Java-the-language, not Java-the-platform. Admittedly, portability is one of Java's (language and platform) main reasons for existing, so it does sound silly to take away that advantage. But people, myself included, have found that they enjoy Java-the-language and would like to use it in situations where they would otherwise use C++. When the desire for a native KDE interface outweighs the desire for perfect portability, this development becomes very useful. I can do what I would with C++ in a language that I prefer.

In my view, this would really only be attractive if you could compile Java to a native executable just like C++ (etc.). Fortunately, the good folks of the gcj project are working on a compiler that turns java source or bytecode into native machine code. That gives me the choice of using Java as a hardware-independent platform when I want, and as a nice high-level compiled language when I want. If the jvm platform was suitable for all situations this wouldn't be necessary, but sometimes native binaries are preferable... particularly when speed is an issue or a native gui is required (which is what this development addresses).

Just my $.02


By kdeFan at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

You must have read my mind! This is probably the best KDE news since KDE 2.0! Java language is great, but not the platform, but with gcj, this will not matter.

KDE + Java + gcj = COOL!

Anyone who knows the state of gcj?


By Stentapp at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

I would be nice if we got this to work under GCJ / CNI. I really like Microsoft's J++ (sorry) for the VB/KDevelop look and easy of use, a Qt/GCJ library could be the first viable competitor, IMHO. Gnome-GCJ is a distant third.


By george moudry at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Then put a JNI wrapper around Qt


By Anonymous at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

A jni wrapper would be nice so that non-native apps could have a native interface, true. Personally, I'm not interested in writing for the jvm, but I do like what I've seen of java and would like to use it as a typical hll. For my purposes, the wrapper mentioned above is perfect. JNI isn't really what I want, because the jni is intended to interface Java with native code. I want the java I write to *be* native code, hence a wrapper around qt is all I need. (I'm probably going to offend a lot of java people by saying that ;)

-kdeFan


By kdeFan at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

A jni wrapper would be nice so that non-native apps could have a native interface, true. Personally, I'm not interested in writing for the jvm, but I do like what I've seen of java and would like to use it as a typical hll. For my purposes, the wrapper mentioned above is perfect. JNI isn't really what I want, because the jni is intended to interface Java with native code. I want the java I write to *be* native code, hence a wrapper around qt is all I need. (I'm probably going to offend a lot of java people by saying that ;)

-kdeFan


By kdeFan at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

What he said + Motif sucks very much! Much better to have themable Qt, and no GTK+ is not an answer.

And also portable Java is very slow, but the language is very nice! So you can get the best of both worlds. Nice java language + Native performance. Except that you'll need gcj to get full native performance, I think.


By KDE User at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

If you have alot of money you can buy native compilers from IBM. Native compiled swing is very fast. Swing is themeable, it probably wouldn't be to hard to make it look like your KDE theme, I believe that GNOME 2 will have this, but I could be wrong. Also Swing is a very good API, and Qt, thin wrappers for Gtk and Motif are not the only toolkits for X.


By John at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

I wonder what happens when The KDE GNOME-theme-wrapper is pointed to the GNOME KDE-theme-wrapper is pointed to the KDE GNOME-theme-wrapper is pointed to the GNOME KDE-theme-wrapper is pointed....


By Silly at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

I wonder what happens when The KDE GNOME-theme-wrapper is pointed to the GNOME KDE-theme-wrapper is pointed to the KDE GNOME-theme-wrapper is pointed to the GNOME KDE-theme-wrapper is pointed....
(Something like this)
continued on parent, please read all responses to the parent as well, and follow all directions.


By SomeOtherGuy at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Qt and JNI are excellent cross platform technologies. So the Qt side of the api is cross platform.


By Richard Dale at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Richard, thanks for your kind contribution to the KDE project. I am currently in the process of learning Java, and your work has given me extra incetive to learn.

It is work like this that inspires others to contribute, and which makes KDE such a fantastic desktop and project to be a part of.

Congratulations. :-)


By Jono Bacon at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

Isn't this illegial(as proved in MS vs SUN).


By Luke at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

No, but what's really ironic is that Sun is supporting that other project while KDE/Qt has already gotten fully fledged Java bindings, no thanks to Sun. =)


By KDE User at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

One thing I would note is that Swing isn't as bad as you make out - there are three main problems - one is that there's a lot of very badly written code out there, thanks to "Java applets for dummies" books and the like, another is that people persist in using (definitely flawed) AWT components, and the third is that people are still using the 1.1 swingall.jar swing instead of 1.3 swing, thanks to MS and Netscape faffing.

The Beans/Swing event handling model is very similar to signals and slots to program (although not in its actual implementation), and I assure you that _my_ swing code is only a little more verbose than Qt code for equivalent functionality,
and that reflection-based at-runtime eventlistener connections are possible, and easy to do. There is stronger type-checking on java's events than Qt signals, though, so you have to explicitly deal with different exceptions when you do dodgy things.

That's not to say I don't prefer Qt programming though! - just that swing is actually not that bad a toolkit (better than programming Gtk in C, anyway, although Gtk--, again, isn't all that bad - I dislike Qt's moc, especially since new C++ compilers have sufficient template support to render it obsolete...), provided you learn it from a decent, i.e. O'Reilly or Sun published, book.


By Silly at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

All the NeXTSTEP/OpenStep guys I know haven't been very impressed with Swing. I don't like to use toolkits whch are just 'not bad' - I think that's the only thing we might disagree on. No moc is needed for Java Qt of course.


By Richard Dale at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

This is indeed excellent! I will try to make use of this in my university projects. It's also a great way to let new programmers write KDE applications without having to learn the (in comparison rather complicated) C++ Syntax.


By gis at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

Hmm... Python syntax is, in many people's opinion, easier than either Java or C++, and Python bindings are already here.


By Silly at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

I wanna Forth binding.


By reihal at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

nice one


By ac at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

don't you mean 'I Forth binding wanna'?


By teferi at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Too bad GNOME has JavaGtk and an implimentation under JNI. But KDE people like to do stuff like integrate browsers into there desktops, use nonportable APIs and component technologies, push nonportable java and FUD the competition. Of course they also do stuff like DoS attacks on google, even though Ximian took there adds down, but the addwords were bought by a free speach advocate.


By Luke at Wed, 2001/02/28 - 6:00am

Fsck!
What is it with all these GNOME trolls on this site recently???
Non-portable? Last time I checked KDE compiled under Linux, all *BSD, Solaris, Aix, HP, etc.
All the components and protocols are open and non-proprietary.
And unlike Ximian they are free.
Go away.


By Jacek at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

While I agree that the guy was a troll, Ximian sells only GPL/GPL compatible(BSD etc) liscensed software. Also X11 apps have little market share for desktop software and probably never will, more likely embedded and also eventualy better protocols like D11 or Berlin(though probably not berlin), that TrollTech probably won't support until it's profitable, while java will run on windows, X11, BeOS, QNX, embedded and more, and you don't even have to recompile.


By KDE-r0XoR$ at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

yea but look at Microsoft there the only people with a better operating system than KDE and KDE is only about 3 years behind once you can stop worying about the competitionn you can start doing codeing. and gnome is not the anwser it sucks because its ugly and other stuff it dosent have even a web browser. plus Ximain tries to trick people to buy free software it proobably almost impossibe to get a free versiom of Ximain GNOME, the olny way to get them probably is by buying them. But places like theKokpany have the software on there site, and trolltechs toolkit is truly free and it uses objcets, Quit your postin g you retard.


By KDEguy at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

"Quit your postin g you retard."
Wow maybe you shouldn't think about baseball players while you post.
This post dosen't help make KDE look any better, only worse.


By Luke at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

But KDE people like to do stuff like integrate browsers into there desktops, use nonportable APIs and component technologies, push nonportable java and FUD the competition.

I'm sure you can remove the khtml kpart if you want and nobody at kde would say it was technically impossible or against their right to innovate. Those "non-portable" APIs and component technologies are free software. Feel free to implement them wherever you desire. The KDE coders build technology that suits their needs, that they (and I) consider to be a good solution to the problem and that's fun to work with. Why does it make you angry that they chose to write code the way they want to? You don't have to use it, you don't have to pay for it, you're free to completey ignore it, and I assure you that they didn't undertake this project with the aim of offending you. Please show them and the readers of this forum at least a basic level of respect.


By kdeFan at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

After QtC will there be a lisp binding?


By KDE-r0XoR$ at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Yes and prolog.. But how solid is KDE's undo code - it could be hammered ;-)


By Richard Dale at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Why did you do a thin wrap of Qt and not do a JNI wrap, would have made alot more sense and all those Swing apps would look cool, not to mention the portability.


By Anonymous at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

One thing I would love to see this used for is a Swing callback to render the components for a custom look and feel. This would be similar to the Mac OS X Aqua look and feel in which the Java code calls back to the native code to draw the user interface elements.

That would be very nice since all java swing applications (and there are some good ones!) would automatically be consistent with the native desktop theme.


By Sean Reilly at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Okay, you want to push a desktop environment and useful applications, time for an unholy alliance... Apple and KDE.

Apple is sitting, IIRC, at around 8% of the desktop, and Linux/Unix around 4%. I figure that KDE has at least half the Linux/Unix desktop market, so combined that is 10% of the desktop.

This kind of alliance is huge, because a MUCH higher percentage of Linux users are programmers than Apple users, while Apple brings a marketshare and a marketshare that will pay for commercial applications.

If you can create a common language for developing MacOS X applications and KDE applications, you now have a competitive desktop standard.

Java has the potential, Mac is pushing Java, hard. KDE pushing Java hard would also create this alliance. GNOME will never push Java, but pushing a REAL KDE-Java solution (this is a start of course...) will let you combine those markets and create something interesting.

Alternatively, get Trolltech to port QT to Cocoa, and port the KDE Libs to Cocoa, so that you can build KDE/MacOS X applications in the KDE Library space that will run natively on both...

Just a thought...

Alex Hochberger
Feratech, Inc.


By Alex Hochberger at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

GNOME will never push Java
GNOME has bindings and a JNI layer so that swing can use the native Gtk. I personaly prefer KDE but Java support is one of those things that GNOME is way ahead in, and with SUN backing you can expect alot of GNOME Java support in the future. If you want to push a portable toolkit use swing and do a JNI wrap thats what it was made for. Also theres a library called wxWindows that looks kinda like MFC that can do Gtk, OSX, Win32, BeOS and theres a Qt port being worked on.


By SomeOtherGuy at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Let me rephrase. While GNOME has a JNI layer, GNOME programmers/users/FSF-types/slashdotters will NEVER push GNOME. :)


By Alex Hochberger at Thu, 2001/03/01 - 6:00am

Your rephrasing made you make even less sense, I can't tell what you mean, all I can get out of this is that people will never push the GNOME platform, which dosen't realy make sense. Sorry but can you please clarify?


By SomeOtherGuy at Fri, 2001/03/02 - 6:00am

Pages