3 ms·
You're right - it would require a bit of work, however, it wouldn't be that bad for a shared UI framework. I also think this kind of thing will be more common a
by jeffreportmill1 8y ago
You're right - it would require a bit of work, however, it wouldn't be that bad for a shared UI framework. I also think this kind of thing will be more common as WebAssembly allows other languages to move to the browser.
- mwcampbell 8y agoDid you consider an SWT-like approach, where the toolkit uses each platform's native widgets? Porting SWT to the Web platform might even be feasible.
- jeffreportmill1 8y agoI have gone down this road before - but I think this is why many people saw Java as "Write Once, Debug Everywhere". It's just hard to write an abstraction that fronts for so much different native code on different platforms. Something is always going to break. Whereas if you run the same code everywhere, it might actually run everywhere.
- mwcampbell 8y agoSo, I guess you have to either take on the extra work of debugging multiple UI implementations, or take on the extra work of making your own toolkit accessible. Personally, I would have chosen the former.
- LoSboccacc 8y agohttps://www.eclipse.org/rap/ https://www.eclipse.org/rap/ (and others) doesn't work that well because the event model between web and desktop is radically different. if you don't have complex interactions or expectation about your widgets it kinda works.