6 ms·
Some suggestions: 1) don't start a new project in Swing when you could use JavaFX instead. Since you're using Kotlin, you'd also want to use TornadoFX, a nice
by kevinherron 9y ago
Some suggestions:
1) don't start a new project in Swing when you could use JavaFX instead. Since you're using Kotlin, you'd also want to use TornadoFX, a nice DSL for JavaFX.
2) use Maven or Gradle (or hell, any build tool). Don't store artifacts in source control.
I was really hoping someone who knew what they were doing was building this after the mini Electron debate earlier this week :/
- westoncb 9y agoHey kevinherron—thanks for the feedback. I actually was aware I could build something nicer with JavaFX, but one of the main constraints on the project was that it satisfy my nostalgia for old Swing apps (particularly the 'Metal' Look and Feel), so I decided to go in that direction. As for building—I agree the current project structure is basically unforgivable :) However, I figured the chances of anyone seeing the project were extremely remote and it was just for fun so I didn't bother with any of the boring stuff. Maybe I'll fix it up a little now though. EDIT: the project now uses Maven.
- kevinherron 9y agoWell, you posted it here, so the chances of someone seeing it got less remote. Now that you've got a build.system in place you won't have to waste time documenting or replying to comments about how to build it :)
- crispinb 9y agoExcuse a quick aside -- do you know of any good examples of real non-enterprisey apps using JavaFX? Java desktop apps seem almost universally awful, but it doesn't seem like it has to be that way. I'd love to see some counter examples (IntelliJ's IDEs are honourable exceptions, but they're a bit of a special case).
- jcpst 9y agoBitwig, an excellent commercial cross-platform DAW, has a UI that is written with Java.
- crispinb 9y agoThanks, looks interesting. Scriptable in javascript too. I always note with irony that professionals expect to pay decent money (Bitwig is $400) for software relevant to their trade; the one exception being software pros.
- erikbye 9y agoVisual Studio Enterprise is $2999/year, Pro is $539. Might as well add anywhere from $400 to $1500 for the IncrediBuild license.
- crispinb 9y agoIt's really the expectations I was commenting on more than the pricing. I have heard devs on 100k plus whinge about $80 for a professional programmers editor, and rule out IntelliJ IDEs from their consideration because they're not 'free'.
- megaman22 9y agoWhen most "expensive" tools are put in terms of Starbucks lattes, they don't look bad. There's still the actual enterprise-targetted tier, but even up to the full Jetbrains Toolbox subscription, you're looking at what amounts to around a coffee a week.
- pjmlp 9y agoThat is peanuts compared with what other professionals have to pay for quality tools, specially if they require some kind of regular certifications.
- mattgreenrocks 9y agoProgrammers have a deep Stockholm Syndrome for infinitely customizable software. They’ll disparage IDEa while installing enough plugins to turn vim into an incredibly poor one. Also, there’s the typical Real Programmer BS that asserts dev tools peaked in the 70s.
- brabel 9y agoThe old LoadUI (load testing tool) was written in JavaFX, you can still see the old screenshots in the documentation: https://www.loadui.org/working-with-loadui/projects.html https://www.loadui.org/working-with-loadui/projects.html Also, there's LoadFX (a logging viewer) which was part of the rage post against Electron last week: https://github.com/renatoathaydes/LogFX https://github.com/renatoathaydes/LogFX And Gluon keeps a list of sample apps: http://gluonhq.com/developers/samples/ http://gluonhq.com/developers/samples/
- crispinb 9y agoCheers. I might have a go at some JavaFX stuff for fun sometime (or more likely TornadoFX with kotlin).