You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
SMT depends on pde.jar, solely for the processing version check feature.
SMT uses processing.app.Base to check the installed version of processing. This works fine as long as one is using gui, or command-line versions of processing. When using only the core processing libraries in java ( which do not include pde.jar ) processing.app.Base is not available.
Using reflection to interface with processing.app.Base would fix this, and allow SMT to compile/work on super old versions of processing, that have a slightly different ( and incompatible ) definition of processing.app.Base. It would also allow detection, without crashing, of new processing versions that have changed processing.app.Base, but still work with SMT.
I've been thinking about this for a while - issue #185 has provoked me thinking about actually fixing it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
pde.jar in included in the repo by default now. I haven't removed the dependency yet though. See issue #185 for the current discussion on exported sketches.
SMT depends on pde.jar, solely for the processing version check feature.
SMT uses processing.app.Base to check the installed version of processing. This works fine as long as one is using gui, or command-line versions of processing. When using only the core processing libraries in java ( which do not include pde.jar ) processing.app.Base is not available.
Using reflection to interface with processing.app.Base would fix this, and allow SMT to compile/work on super old versions of processing, that have a slightly different ( and incompatible ) definition of processing.app.Base. It would also allow detection, without crashing, of new processing versions that have changed processing.app.Base, but still work with SMT.
I've been thinking about this for a while - issue #185 has provoked me thinking about actually fixing it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: