4 ms·

The tooling in my opinion is much better and the barrier of entry is much lower. How many people have been deterred from writing Java because of eclipse configu

by tfmatt 9y ago

The tooling in my opinion is much better and the barrier of entry is much lower. How many people have been deterred from writing Java because of eclipse configuration? Setting up a remote webserver, launching an app with debug parameters, install eclipsing, setting up a new project and connecting to the remote app. With client side JavaScript (my specialty) the debugger is built right into the browser, hit F12 and you are debugging. The barrier to entry for developing a UI in JavaScript is extremely low. Mocking out JSON data, and running a simple python server to test a couple ideas takes minutes. Try that with JSP, JSF, JSTL, PrimeFrames etc. See you in a week.

JustSomeNobody 9y ago
> How many people have been deterred from writing Java because of eclipse configuration? And yet, this hypothetical person wants to write an Electron app to run on desktops? I don't get this argument. If you are good enough to understand how to write and deploy an Electron app, you should certainly be able to understand Eclipse. Note: I'm not advocating for Java here...
- murukesh_s 9y ago
  That was probably a bad argument, setting up eclipse shouldn't be tougher than setting up tooling for modern SPA frameworks like react or vue.. But Electron is a there for a different reason. I can convert my SPA to a working desktop app with minimal coding (same Css/js front end/ja backend, if you use nodeJs). And even it works for all major platforms. So I literally have one codebase for web and all three desktop platforms.. beat that! I know it's not optimal to have everyone open a chromium instance under the hood but how bad is it from JVM?
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    Much worse, it consumes more RAM, executes slower and lacks the platform integration even what Swing is capable of, reducing the UI/UX to the minimum denominator of HTML5 / CSS3 capabilities. And with Java, I have the option to have an actual binary, 100% native code, if I feel inclined to do so. Something that many Java haters keep being unaware of.
    - TomMarius 9y ago
      Yes, technologically worse. Decision to go with Electron is a business one.

by tfmatt 9y ago

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

> How many people have been deterred from writing Java because of eclipse configuration? And yet, this hypothetical person wants to write an Electron app to run on desktops? I don't get this argument. If you are good enough to understand how to write and deploy an Electron app, you should certainly be able to understand Eclipse. Note: I'm not advocating for Java here...

murukesh_s 9y ago
That was probably a bad argument, setting up eclipse shouldn't be tougher than setting up tooling for modern SPA frameworks like react or vue.. But Electron is a there for a different reason. I can convert my SPA to a working desktop app with minimal coding (same Css/js front end/ja backend, if you use nodeJs). And even it works for all major platforms. So I literally have one codebase for web and all three desktop platforms.. beat that! I know it's not optimal to have everyone open a chromium instance under the hood but how bad is it from JVM?
- pjmlp 9y ago
  Much worse, it consumes more RAM, executes slower and lacks the platform integration even what Swing is capable of, reducing the UI/UX to the minimum denominator of HTML5 / CSS3 capabilities. And with Java, I have the option to have an actual binary, 100% native code, if I feel inclined to do so. Something that many Java haters keep being unaware of.
  - TomMarius 9y ago
    Yes, technologically worse. Decision to go with Electron is a business one.