3 ms·

I will freely admit that Java Swing remains the only GUI toolkit I've used that I actually felt comfortable using to write a GUI, rather than something that fee

I will freely admit that Java Swing remains the only GUI toolkit I've used that I actually felt comfortable using to write a GUI, rather than something that feels like having to pull out teeth to get things working in a somewhat coherent manner.

QuercusMax 5y ago
Absolutely agree, provided you use a layout manager that isn't brain damaged. Anyone remember this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuLaxbFKAcc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuLaxbFKAcc - Totally Gridbag
MaxBarraclough 5y ago
I don't do a lot of GUI programming, but I always found the Swing layouting to be very frustrating and counterintuitive. As others have said, JavaFX is really pretty good. People who use JavaFX generally seem to be satisfied, it's not often I see a substantive criticism of it, but unfortunately it seems to be widely regarded as too little too late and doesn't get given a chance. The Ada of the GUI toolkit world.
bitwize 5y ago
You haven't tried AppKit, WinForms, or WPF.
- datavirtue 5y ago
  Winforms is dead, as in not cross platform and WPF...the same. WPF is declarative XML as is Xamarin Forms (both slightly different XML oddly). Not fun.
  - mike_hearn 5y ago
    XML is actually pretty good at declaring UI. It's the sort of thing the language was designed for - a UI is a tree of attributed nodes, and that's also what XML gives you.
  - thrower123 5y ago
    Winforms is undead. We'll be writing WinForms applications in the 22nd century.
  - jeroenhd 5y ago
    Microsoft's refusal to port WinForms is truly the most disappointing part of its cross-platform efforts, in my opinion. They have Mono, they can get it working, they just choose not to. I wouldn't build a production application in WinForms, WPF and friends are much better for that. But, for quick&dirty or even moderately complex tools for experts, VS + WinForms simply has no equal. Some Python-based designers come close, but they definitely suffer when it comes to distribution. With modern dotnet tech, Microsoft could allow us to build a (rather sizable) single, statically linked binary for any architecture, with the impressive performance of the dotnet JIT and native controls. After working on Android designs, I've got to say, XML is fine for UI design. You need previews and visual inspectors to get an accurate idea of what you're doing, but describing what control lives where and what properties it has is a perfectly sensible use case for XML.
    - kaba0 5y ago
      It wouldn’t make much sense to port Winforms any more, as it is CPU-renderer only. It would be disappointingly slow for anything more complex than, well, forms.
bigger_cheese 5y ago
For a while I thought GTK was great hope for a good toolkit. I remember about this time period in this article (early 2000's) messing around with Perl/GTK to write simple desktop apps. Unfortunately had issues with new version breaking backwards compatibility etc. which killed it. QT also had similar hype but never took off.

QuercusMax 5y ago

Absolutely agree, provided you use a layout manager that isn't brain damaged. Anyone remember this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuLaxbFKAcc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuLaxbFKAcc - Totally Gridbag

MaxBarraclough 5y ago

I don't do a lot of GUI programming, but I always found the Swing layouting to be very frustrating and counterintuitive. As others have said, JavaFX is really pretty good. People who use JavaFX generally seem to be satisfied, it's not often I see a substantive criticism of it, but unfortunately it seems to be widely regarded as too little too late and doesn't get given a chance. The Ada of the GUI toolkit world.

bitwize 5y ago

You haven't tried AppKit, WinForms, or WPF.

datavirtue 5y ago
Winforms is dead, as in not cross platform and WPF...the same. WPF is declarative XML as is Xamarin Forms (both slightly different XML oddly). Not fun.
- mike_hearn 5y ago
  XML is actually pretty good at declaring UI. It's the sort of thing the language was designed for - a UI is a tree of attributed nodes, and that's also what XML gives you.
- thrower123 5y ago
  Winforms is undead. We'll be writing WinForms applications in the 22nd century.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  Microsoft's refusal to port WinForms is truly the most disappointing part of its cross-platform efforts, in my opinion. They have Mono, they can get it working, they just choose not to. I wouldn't build a production application in WinForms, WPF and friends are much better for that. But, for quick&dirty or even moderately complex tools for experts, VS + WinForms simply has no equal. Some Python-based designers come close, but they definitely suffer when it comes to distribution. With modern dotnet tech, Microsoft could allow us to build a (rather sizable) single, statically linked binary for any architecture, with the impressive performance of the dotnet JIT and native controls. After working on Android designs, I've got to say, XML is fine for UI design. You need previews and visual inspectors to get an accurate idea of what you're doing, but describing what control lives where and what properties it has is a perfectly sensible use case for XML.
  - kaba0 5y ago
    It wouldn’t make much sense to port Winforms any more, as it is CPU-renderer only. It would be disappointingly slow for anything more complex than, well, forms.

bigger_cheese 5y ago

For a while I thought GTK was great hope for a good toolkit. I remember about this time period in this article (early 2000's) messing around with Perl/GTK to write simple desktop apps. Unfortunately had issues with new version breaking backwards compatibility etc. which killed it. QT also had similar hype but never took off.