Posted by
Robert Dougherty on
Mar 09, 2009; 7:31pm
URL: http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/Some-thoughts-about-ImageJ-tp3693353p3693369.html
Dscho,
>
>
> So using Clojure, Jython, Javascript, JRuby or BeanShell does not
> affect
> portability and ease of installation at all.
>
>>
One of my favorite features of ImageJ is that it provides it own
simple development environment: Compile And Run.... I don't like
spending time setting up environments and learning languages. This
overhead is a distraction from working on science and engineering
projects. On the other hand, keeping up with computer science
developments is also important. I don't think I would be very
effective if I still programmed in FORTRAN 77. In many ways, Java's
structure lends itself to rapid, correct development and taking
advantage of a range of APIs. (In other ways, of course, it is
frustrating.) I could be wrong, but it seems to me that ImageJ is a
good as Java APIs get. It is certainly more solid than Java Sound
or, sigh, Quicktime for Java. So how to identify the real way
forward? Ask Wayne? We are are all standing on his shoulders.
Bob
Robert Dougherty, Ph.D.
President, OptiNav, Inc.
4176 148th Ave. NE
Redmond, WA 98052
Tel. (425)891-4883
FAX (425)467-1119
www.optinav.com
[hidden email]