4 ms·

Yeah UWP has a lot of good features but I always find when I go to it that it just lacks so many basics. It's like they kept building good stuff on top of Silve

by grokys 10y ago

Yeah UWP has a lot of good features but I always find when I go to it that it just lacks so many basics. It's like they kept building good stuff on top of Silverlight which stripped out a lot of useful stuff. Having said that I've not used it extensively (I had a good stab at Metro, but man that sucked) and ever since haven't gone back. It's not x-plat either ;) Obviously with Avalonia we have a long way to go (hence the Alpha) so we're getting the basics down first. Layout on the UI thread is definitely a limitation too. I'd be interested to hear ideas as to how it could be done in a threaded manner.

xamluser 10y ago
UWP XAML has pretty much surpassed WPF with the latest SDK. There are some things missing, but the new features outweigh that and the performance is significantly better since it's all C++ and sits on top of DirectComposition instead of milcore. Many of the things that were removed (like FindAncestor bindings and DataContext inheritance) were done so for perf reasons or because they were refundant. I'd use it as the basis for Avalonia instead of WPF. If only to have x:Bind instead of {Binding}, which thanks to function bindings removes a lot of ViewModel boilerplate.
- neppo 10y ago
  do you know any good resources that provide insights on the differences between WPF and UWP?
- MichaelGG 10y ago
  I'm not on Win10 - are UWP apps still slow and clunky? Like they don't really act like normal windows? Still tablet-optimized or whatever? Last I checked on the W10 beta calc took several seconds to launch. (And had far less features, like no editable history.) MS flubbed the launch and followup on Metro so hard (not to mention the shitware on the Store) it's really, really, turned me off from using or playing with it.
  - xamluser 10y ago
    In general, UWP apps that feel slow or somehow off are web apps. UWP XAML is really fast.
  - contextfree 10y ago
    WinRT XAML is much faster than WPF ever was, it's just that they've started using it in very performance sensitive places where they never used any form of XAML before, like the calculator and start menu (the XAML calculator definitely doesn't take several seconds for me BTW, more like one second, but that's still too slow IMO), and it's still slower than the internal frameworks and bare Win32 calls they used to use. If they were WPF they'd be even slower.
- int_19h 10y ago
  I'm not super familiar with x:Bind, but based on what you're describing, it sounds like something that could be done in WPF (or, presumably, something that copies its design), as a markup extension. Fpr example (note wpf:Lambda): https://github.com/Microsoft/RTVS/blob/828b4e3919cbed507a4d0f51b621b00a7fc8c25b/src/Package/Impl/DataInspect/VariableView.xaml#L91 https://github.com/Microsoft/RTVS/blob/828b4e3919cbed507a4d0... Obviously this is still more verbose, because it is a converter on a binding (although it could be shortened further by providing a custom Binding-derived class, I think).

by grokys 10y ago

xamluser 10y ago

UWP XAML has pretty much surpassed WPF with the latest SDK. There are some things missing, but the new features outweigh that and the performance is significantly better since it's all C++ and sits on top of DirectComposition instead of milcore. Many of the things that were removed (like FindAncestor bindings and DataContext inheritance) were done so for perf reasons or because they were refundant. I'd use it as the basis for Avalonia instead of WPF. If only to have x:Bind instead of {Binding}, which thanks to function bindings removes a lot of ViewModel boilerplate.

neppo 10y ago
do you know any good resources that provide insights on the differences between WPF and UWP?
MichaelGG 10y ago
I'm not on Win10 - are UWP apps still slow and clunky? Like they don't really act like normal windows? Still tablet-optimized or whatever? Last I checked on the W10 beta calc took several seconds to launch. (And had far less features, like no editable history.) MS flubbed the launch and followup on Metro so hard (not to mention the shitware on the Store) it's really, really, turned me off from using or playing with it.
- xamluser 10y ago
  In general, UWP apps that feel slow or somehow off are web apps. UWP XAML is really fast.
- contextfree 10y ago
  WinRT XAML is much faster than WPF ever was, it's just that they've started using it in very performance sensitive places where they never used any form of XAML before, like the calculator and start menu (the XAML calculator definitely doesn't take several seconds for me BTW, more like one second, but that's still too slow IMO), and it's still slower than the internal frameworks and bare Win32 calls they used to use. If they were WPF they'd be even slower.
int_19h 10y ago
I'm not super familiar with x:Bind, but based on what you're describing, it sounds like something that could be done in WPF (or, presumably, something that copies its design), as a markup extension. Fpr example (note wpf:Lambda): https://github.com/Microsoft/RTVS/blob/828b4e3919cbed507a4d0f51b621b00a7fc8c25b/src/Package/Impl/DataInspect/VariableView.xaml#L91 https://github.com/Microsoft/RTVS/blob/828b4e3919cbed507a4d0... Obviously this is still more verbose, because it is a converter on a binding (although it could be shortened further by providing a custom Binding-derived class, I think).