4 ms·
> It may not be proper "native" development, but I don't have to deal with <div> hell. It has proper layout management If you want something that's much closer
by curun1r 10y ago
> It may not be proper "native" development, but I don't have to deal with <div> hell. It has proper layout management
If you want something that's much closer to proper native, have a look at SWT. It's faster than Swing and actually looks/feels native since it's actually using native widgets. It's really a shame that the poster child application, Eclipse, is so bloated and slow, because people attribute that slowness to SWT when it's really primarily the plugin architecture that's responsible. And I actually find the more spartan developer interface to be more pleasant than Swing, so to me it's win-win. Swing will always have an uncanny valley, SWT has never had that issue, yet still allows you to write for the desktop in only Java.
- cpburns2009 10y agoThanks for the tip. I'll have to look into SWT. I only chose Swing because it was included by default, but I would prefer to have the actual native look on each OS.
- MarkMc 10y agoI agree. I've been developing Swing and SWT applications for 15 years. SWT has a simple, lightweight API that just works. Swing is so bloated an complicated that you will be tearing your hair out to perform simple tasks. I feel that Sun's choice of Swing was the main reason Java failed on the desktop.