JavaFX Requires 'code' Folder to Run

[vsquared]

Most relevant area for this enhancement?

Build process

Feature to enhance

Pre-installation of javafx.xxxx.jar files in another folder.

Enhancement details

Pull request #856 added all seven of the javafx modules to the Processing editor. However, some users particularly on Linux and Windows were unable to run JavaFX demos without manually adding a 'code' folder to the sketch and copy/pasting the jar files or drag 'n dropping the javafx.jar files onto an open sketch to create the 'code' folder automatically. The javafx.xxxxx.jar files were present, but buried deeper inside operating system folders and inside a nested 'modules' folder. Unfortunately the runtime did not know how to access these files. The issue has been discussed in detail here: https://discourse.processing.org/t/processing-and-javafx/45692/13

Related Finding:
I've never had a problem running JavaFX demos on my MacOS system. I now realize that this is because I have always had the javafx.xxxx.jar files in my Processing/libraries/javafx/library folder. I tried temporarily removing all of these and I was no longer able to run JavaFX files (missing library error message). I then reinstalled the javafx.xxxx.jar files to this folder which 'fixed' the problem and brought back the ability to run Java/FX source code.

Solution:
A simple solution is to copy/paste all of the 'javafx.xxxx.jar' files plus 'javafx.jar' into the Processing/libraries/javafx/library folder where they are accessible to the runtime. This has been tested on all three platforms and appears to be a valid solution to the problem. To spare the user from copy/pasting the javafx.jar files perhaps they could be installed in the Processing/libraries/javafx/library folder before distribution or when the library is installed from the Processing menubar (Sketch/Import Library.../JavaFX). It is unclear to me when the 'javafx' folder is added to Processing/libraries.

Confirmation:
After installing the javafx modules as described above you should be able to run this simple demo on your system without using a 'code' folder:

Test javafx source code:

import javafx.scene.canvas.Canvas;
import javafx.scene.layout.StackPane;

Canvas canvas;
StackPane root;

void setup(){
 size(350,200,FX2D);  
 surface.setTitle("JavaFX in Default Wnd");
 canvas = (Canvas)surface.getNative();
 root = (StackPane)canvas.getParent();
}

void draw(){
  fill(0,255,0);
  circle(width/2,100,100);
}

Processing/libraries/javafx/library folder should look like this on Windows 11:

Would you like to help implement this enhancement?

Yes, I’d like to help with this

[glvjr]

Hello @vsquared ,

Thanks for revisiting this topic!

More details here:
https://discourse.processing.org/t/processing-and-javafx/45692/16

From post linked above:
I was able to make modifications to the JavaBuild.java and run the JavaFX sketches in this topic with the JavaFX library as is out of the box (no copying or adding jars).

I started working on this some time ago, and this nudged me to resume!
This is still a work in progress.

The root cause must be addressed to ensure future integration with the new Java Platform Module System.

You stated:

Unfortunately the runtime did not know how to access these files.

I was able to resolve some of this with modifications to the JavaBuild.java file:

/*
if (!importedLibraries.contains(library)) {
          importedLibraries.add(library);
          // don't add the JavaFX libraries to the classpath
          // https://github.com/processing/processing4/issues/212
          // Disabling this after all, because we need our javafx.jar (PGraphicsJavaFX)
          // and the JavaFX .jars are safely tucked into a "modules" subfolder
          //if (!library.getName().equals("JavaFX")) {
          classPath += library.getClassPath();
          //}
          javaLibraryPath += File.pathSeparator + library.getNativePath();
          // DEBUG:
          System.out.println("javaLibraryPath: " + javaLibraryPath);
          System.out.println("classPath: " + classPath); 
        }
 */

        //*********************************************************    
        if (!importedLibraries.contains(library)) {
          importedLibraries.add(library);

        // Workaround: 
        // Implement custom Class Path construction for JavaFX to satisfy compiler requirements
        // by injecting the seven missing module JARs and ensuring correct file order.
          if (library.getName().equals("JavaFX")) {
            
            // 1. Find and inject the 'javafx.jar' Placeholder JAR (contains PGraphicsJavaFX).
            File nativePathFile = new File(library.getNativePath());
            File libraryRoot = nativePathFile.getParentFile();
            File fxPlaceholderJar = new File(libraryRoot, "javafx.jar");

            if (fxPlaceholderJar.exists()) {
              classPath += File.pathSeparator + fxPlaceholderJar.getAbsolutePath();
              //DEBUG:
              System.out.println("FX_CP_PLACEHOLDER: " + File.pathSeparator + fxPlaceholderJar.getAbsolutePath());
            }

            // 2. Find and inject all individual JavaFX module JARs from the 'modules' folder.
            File modulesFolder = new File(library.getNativePath(), "modules");
            if (modulesFolder.exists()) {
              File[] jarFiles = modulesFolder.listFiles((dir, name) -> name.toLowerCase().endsWith(".jar"));
              if (jarFiles != null) {
                //int moduleCount = 0; // DEBUG: Counter added
                for (File moduleJar : jarFiles) {
                  classPath += File.pathSeparator + moduleJar.getAbsolutePath();
                  // DEBUG:
                  System.out.println("FX_CP_MODULE_INJECT: " + File.pathSeparator + moduleJar.getAbsolutePath());
                  //moduleCount++;
                }
                // DEBUG:
                //System.out.println("FX_CP_COUNT:" + moduleCount + " JavaFX module paths.");
              }
            }
          } else {
            // For all other non-modular libraries, add their full Class Path as normal.
            classPath += library.getClassPath(); 
          }

          // ALWAYS add the native path, required for the Module Path runtime.
          javaLibraryPath += File.pathSeparator + library.getNativePath();
          //DEBUG:
          System.out.println("javaLibraryPath: " + javaLibraryPath);
          System.out.println("classPath: " + classPath);
        }
//*********************************************************

:)

[glvjr]

Hello @SableRaf,

I shared an alternative approach to resolving issues related to JavaFX integration.
Should this be a separate issue?

From my code in last post:

// Workaround: 
// Implement custom Class Path construction for JavaFX to satisfy compiler requirements
// by injecting the seven missing module JARs and ensuring correct file order.

Regards,
glvjr

[vsquared]

@glvjr

I tried your proposed code change in Intellij CE which creates a new version of the Processing editor from a copy of the original source code. I then tried to run a javafx demo after I removed all the jar files from my Documents/Processing/libraries/javafx/library folder to see if the proposed code would run and replace the jar files. Unfortunately the modified editor would not run the javafx demo and generated this error message (MacOS):

Graphics Device initialization failed for :  es2, sw
Error initializing QuantumRenderer: no suitable pipeline found
java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: Error initializing QuantumRenderer: no suitable pipeline found
	at com.sun.javafx.tk.quantum.QuantumRenderer.getInstance(QuantumRenderer.java:283)
	at com.sun.javafx.tk.quantum.QuantumToolkit.init(QuantumToolkit.java:254)
	at com.sun.javafx.tk.Toolkit.getToolkit(Toolkit.java:264)
	at com.sun.javafx.perf.PerformanceTracker.logEvent(PerformanceTracker.java:100)
	at javafx.scene.Node.<clinit>(Node.java:417)
	at processing.javafx.PGraphicsFX2D$FontCache.<init>(Unknown Source)
	at processing.javafx.PGraphicsFX2D.<init>(Unknown Source)
	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native Method)
	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.java:77)
	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:45)
	at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstanceWithCaller(Constructor.java:499)
	at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance(Constructor.java:480)
	at processing.core.PApplet.makeGraphics(PApplet.java:1900)
	at processing.core.PApplet.createPrimaryGraphics(PApplet.java:1979)
	at processing.core.PApplet.initSurface(PApplet.java:10179)
	at processing.core.PApplet.runSketch(PApplet.java:10140)
	at processing.core.PApplet.main(PApplet.java:9861)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: Error initializing QuantumRenderer: no suitable pipeline found
	at com.sun.javafx.tk.quantum.QuantumRenderer$PipelineRunnable.init(QuantumRenderer.java:95)
	at com.sun.javafx.tk.quantum.QuantumRenderer$PipelineRunnable.run(QuantumRenderer.java:125)
	at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833)
ExceptionInInitializerError
ExceptionInInitializerError
java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
	at processing.javafx.PGraphicsFX2D$FontCache.<init>(Unknown Source)
	at processing.javafx.PGraphicsFX2D.<init>(Unknown Source)
	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native Method)
	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.java:77)
	at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:45)
	at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstanceWithCaller(Constructor.java:499)
	at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance(Constructor.java:480)
	at processing.core.PApplet.makeGraphics(PApplet.java:1900)
	at processing.core.PApplet.createPrimaryGraphics(PApplet.java:1979)
	at processing.core.PApplet.initSurface(PApplet.java:10179)
	at processing.core.PApplet.runSketch(PApplet.java:10140)
	at processing.core.PApplet.main(PApplet.java:9861)
Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: No toolkit found
	at com.sun.javafx.tk.Toolkit.getToolkit(Toolkit.java:276)
	at com.sun.javafx.perf.PerformanceTracker.logEvent(PerformanceTracker.java:100)
	at javafx.scene.Node.<clinit>(Node.java:417)
	... 12 more
ExceptionInInitializerError

I looked to see if the jar files were in the javafx/library folder and they were not there. I have seen this error message on other projects, and likely is due to the absence of javafx.xxxx.jar files as I recall.

[glvjr]

@vsquared ,

I updated my post above for clarity.
No JAR files were moved, copied, linked or otherwise.
I am modifying the Class Paths in Processing to address the root cause.
It works on my Windows 10 system with Processing 4.4.10.
I edit with VS Code and build with Gradle successfully.

I use the JavaFX import in all my code:
import processing.javafx.*;

I am unable to assist with your IntelliJ builds on MacOS.

[vsquared]

@glvjr

Adding the one line of code made no difference; same error message. I'm not sure why VS Code vs. IntelliJ would make any difference. Ultimately your fix will have to work cross-platform.

[glvjr]

Hello @catilac,

This is now in your good hands! 🙏

Hello @svan,

Your comments state:

I removed all the jar files from my Documents/Processing/libraries/javafx/library folder

The error may be caused by removing the javafx.jar file (which contains PGraphicsJavaFX), a component of the JavaFX library.

I do not wish to clutter this issue.
I have presented an "alternative approach" (a work in progress) to address the Class Paths (separate issue) for consideration.
There are platform-specific sections of code for macOS that I did not explore.

:)

[vsquared]

@glvjr

The error may be caused by removing the javafx.jar file (which contains PGraphicsJavaFX), a component of the JavaFX library.

That's correct; I put back just the javafx.jar file (it's not one of the seven modules) and it now works on MacOS. On my system import processing.javafx.*; in the test code is not required (and never has been). I used IntelliJ to create the modified editor.

Thanks for your contributions.

Test file output:

[glvjr]

With my modified source code I can run JavaFX examples, but get these:

W10,
Processing 4.4.10 (modified)

Leaving this for a rainy day.

[vsquared]

I can run JavaFX examples, but get these:

Same here:

This won't happen if the seven javafx.xxxx.jar files are installed into the javafx/library folder.