Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. USholgero
    primarykey
    data
    text
    plurals
    1. CO1. Not being able to shutdown Java3d properly without resorting to System.exit() is a severe limitation. (See my answer to andrewdotn's comment on my question.) 2. Curiosity. 3. I don't think it is re-inventing the wheel. 4. Insisting on finding a way to terminate in a clean way has already helped me to spot another bug in my application (where an invisible JFrame was created accidentally which also blocked the clean exit). 5. I am not convinced, that you are right in saying that System.exit() is the correct way to end an application. I think it is rather a last resort than the right way
      singulars
    2. CO@hoaz yes, this did it. Many thanks! The only drawback is that the Renderer class is package private, so I had to resort to reflection, to call it. I will write the coding I used for this in an answer.
      singulars
    3. CO@ncenerar The problem with sending `interrupt()` only to the Java3D thread group is not that some other threads remain afterwards, but that the Java3D threads more or less ignore the call. I looked into the implementation (from the github repository I mentioned) and they do this with the `InterruptedException`: catch it, print its name to stderr and then simply continue with their loop. So in short: sending `interrupt()` to more threads or thread groups won't help (Have to admit I didn't try it out, though).
      singulars
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload