Skip to content

Jvm Implementation#120

Open
Deaths-Door wants to merge 4 commits intoicerockdev:developfrom
Deaths-Door:jvm-desktop
Open

Jvm Implementation#120
Deaths-Door wants to merge 4 commits intoicerockdev:developfrom
Deaths-Door:jvm-desktop

Conversation

@Deaths-Door
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@Alex009 Alex009 changed the base branch from master to develop June 24, 2024 03:46
}

override suspend fun getPermissionState(permission: Permission): PermissionState {
return PermissionState.Granted
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's not true. on macos for example we have runtime permissions and JVM desktop should work with it too

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
package dev.icerock.moko.permissions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

copyright required

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
package dev.icerock.moko.permissions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

copyright required

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
package dev.icerock.moko.permissions.compose
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

copyright required

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
package dev.icerock.moko.permissions.compose
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

copyright required

@Alex009 Alex009 linked an issue Jun 24, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@Rafael2616
Copy link
Copy Markdown

any update on this pull?

@vunder
Copy link
Copy Markdown

vunder commented Apr 13, 2025

Any change to get this done?

@ishroid
Copy link
Copy Markdown

ishroid commented May 27, 2025

After the JVM hot reload release, this library is useless until it has a JVM implementation.

@TepesLucian
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Any updates on this?

@hristijan-n
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Any news on this?

@Glass109
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Glass109 commented Jan 6, 2026

Is no one clicking merge because...?

@Alex009
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Alex009 commented Jan 7, 2026

because mock implementation is not that expected by library users by default.

#120 (comment)

if library will support jvm target by default and just do nothing in runtime it will confuse users.

@esial
Copy link
Copy Markdown

esial commented Jan 7, 2026

if library will support jvm target by default and just do nothing in runtime it will confuse users.
@Alex009 Don't you think that crash caused by adding jvm target is more confusing?

@Alex009
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Alex009 commented Jan 7, 2026

There no crash. When project contains unsupported target Gradle will not find dependency and can't compile project.

@esial
Copy link
Copy Markdown

esial commented Jan 7, 2026

You're right. Yet still library force project to has a specific config.

@Glass109
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Glass109 commented Jan 7, 2026

I understand the reasoning, but more often than not, people are going to add the library to the common source set expecting that it will handle iOS, Android and Desktop

You say that it has no reason for it to be enabled for JVM, and I agree, but I argue that providing an implementation that always says "Yeah, whatever" on Desktop is more friendly and saves the users the hassle of making actual/expects for simple permissions

Middle ground would be an annotation called @AcknowledgeJvmAlwaysTrue or something

@Jessewb786
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Two years to merge a pull request which makes the lives of developers easier...
I'm developing an app that only has android and jvm, and the only reason I'm not using this library is because of this.

@voltangle
Copy link
Copy Markdown

You say that it has no reason for it to be enabled for JVM, and I agree, but I argue that providing an implementation that always says "Yeah, whatever" on Desktop is more friendly and saves the users the hassle of making actual/expects for simple permissions

Yes, but the problem is that not all desktop OSes just don't have permissions. macOS is similar to iOS in this regard, to use Bluetooth for example you have to go through the permission system to get access to the BLE API, and just saying "whatever permission granted" will not be true, at least on macOS. Idk about Windows and Linux tho

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add jvm permissions