gui design

[cmk128]

Hi
I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?
I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?
thanks
from Peter (cm****@hotmail .com)

[Victor Bazarov]

cm****@hotmail. com wrote:

I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

Correct in what? That you found it? Probably not. Other folks had
probably "found" the same thing before you. That it is "the most
easiest to use"? Probably not. "Ease" is part of perception, so it
cannot be objectively "the most".

I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?

Be careful not to waste your time on something that nobody needs.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Phlip]

cmk128 wrote:

I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

Swing is a very poor architecture, and Java is not a good library for GUIs
in general.

Why are you developing a new GUI library? What's wrong with the dozens of
existing ones?

I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?

I would research Qt or wxWidgets, in C++. But I would also investigate using
a softer language. C++ is for high-performance situations, and GUIs only
need to respond in user-time. And softer languages like Python, Ruby,
Smalltalk, etc. support "block closures". They make GUI events absurdly easy
to code, whereas C++ makes them absurdly hard.

That's the main reason Java is a poor language for GUIs. To compete with
C++, Java did not start with any advanced OO concepts, just _some_ aspects
of C++-style static typing. So yet another irony of our industry is the
majority of GUI projects are written in languages promoted as being good for
GUIs when they are actually very bad!

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

[Bart]

cm****@hotmail. com wrote:

Hi
I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

'Overdesigned' would probably be a better term.

Regards,
Bart.

[Bart]

Phlip wrote:

cmk128 wrote:

I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

Swing is a very poor architecture, and Java is not a good library for GUIs
in general.

Why are you developing a new GUI library? What's wrong with the dozens of
existing ones?

Given that he's an OS developer, perhaps he really meant that he is
implementing a GUI library, not developing one.

I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?

I would research Qt or wxWidgets, in C++. But I would also investigate using
a softer language. C++ is for high-performance situations, and GUIs only
need to respond in user-time. And softer languages like Python, Ruby,
Smalltalk, etc. support "block closures". They make GUI events absurdly easy
to code, whereas C++ makes them absurdly hard.

That's the main reason Java is a poor language for GUIs. To compete with
C++, Java did not start with any advanced OO concepts, just _some_ aspects
of C++-style static typing. So yet another irony of our industry is the
majority of GUI projects are written in languages promoted as being good for
GUIs when they are actually very bad!

I have to agree here. You can use C++ or Java for application
infrastructure and a scripting language for the UI. It's a very
flexible approach that has merits. However, given the note about OS
development perhaps the intent is to provide the actual low-level GUI
support of the OS, like the Win32 API in Windows.

Regards,
Bart.

[Jens Theisen]

"Phlip" <ph******@yahoo .comwrites:

C++ is for high-performance situations, and GUIs only
need to respond in user-time.

Now I realise why most UI applications take ages to respond! They
respond in user time!

Apparantly this is even possible in C++.

Regards,

Jens

[cmk128]

Phlip 寫�：

cmk128 wrote:

I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

Swing is a very poor architecture, and Java is not a good library for GUIs
in general.

Why are you developing a new GUI library? What's wrong with the dozens of
existing ones?

I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?

I would research Qt or wxWidgets, in C++. But I would also investigate using
a softer language. C++ is for high-performance situations, and GUIs only
need to respond in user-time. And softer languages like Python, Ruby,
Smalltalk, etc. support "block closures". They make GUI events absurdly easy
to code, whereas C++ makes them absurdly hard.

That's the main reason Java is a poor language for GUIs. To compete with
C++, Java did not start with any advanced OO concepts, just _some_ aspects
of C++-style static typing. So yet another irony of our industry is the
majority of GUI projects are written in languages promoted as being good for
GUIs when they are actually very bad!

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

Hi Phlip
What is "block closures"?
thanks
from Peter

[cmk128]

Phlip 寫�：

cmk128 wrote:

I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

Swing is a very poor architecture, and Java is not a good library for GUIs
in general.

Why are you developing a new GUI library? What's wrong with the dozens of
existing ones?

I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?

I would research Qt or wxWidgets, in C++. But I would also investigate using
a softer language. C++ is for high-performance situations, and GUIs only
need to respond in user-time. And softer languages like Python, Ruby,
Smalltalk, etc. support "block closures". They make GUI events absurdly easy
to code, whereas C++ makes them absurdly hard.

That's the main reason Java is a poor language for GUIs. To compete with
C++, Java did not start with any advanced OO concepts, just _some_ aspects
of C++-style static typing. So yet another irony of our industry is the
majority of GUI projects are written in languages promoted as being good for
GUIs when they are actually very bad!

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

Why swing is poor architecture? i think swing is very easy to use, and
all its components are OO concept. I know some people saying swing is
slow, but it is nothing to do with swing, it is the performance problem
of the VM, not the problem of the GUI library itself.

In swing, you will never get a segmentation fault, everything is
neither working or not-working. Java is a very safety langauge, unlike
c++, some code look like working, but will generate a segmentation
fault after running a long time.

I want to avoid this in the GUI library, but not very clear how i can
do it :(
thanks
from Peter

[Phlip]

cmk128 wrote:

Why swing is poor architecture?

Because I have experience with the best OO GUI toolkits, and Swing can't do
what they do, at the level of the language itself.

Beyond that, I have almost no experience with Swing itself, and I do not
doubt that a Java expert can use it elegantly, reliably, and robustly.

In swing, you will never get a segmentation fault, everything is
neither working or not-working. Java is a very safety langauge, unlike
c++, some code look like working, but will generate a segmentation
fault after running a long time.

That's because Sun invented Java by removing the features from C++ that make
it fast. I can easily write programs that never fault (modulo whatever
compiler and platform they use). And I can crash a Java program with one arm
tied behind my back.

I want to avoid this in the GUI library, but not very clear how i can
do it :(

Download and run many GUI libraries, in many languages. You must learn much
more than Swing before you even start your project. Even download Amulet (if
you can find it), Frog, FLTK, and Fox. And run them in different languages.

If you design a library when all you know is Swing and C++, you will make
many mistakes that other libraries show the fixes for.

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

[Dave Townsend]

<cm****@hotmail .comwrote in message
news:11******** **************@ i3g2000cwc.goog legroups.com...

Phlip ??:

cmk128 wrote:

I am an os developer, i am developing a gui library. I found that
java swing is the most easiest to use gui library , am i correct?

Swing is a very poor architecture, and Java is not a good library for GUIs
in general.

Why are you developing a new GUI library? What's wrong with the dozens of
existing ones?

I am trying to port swing to c++, is there any thing i should be
careful?

I would research Qt or wxWidgets, in C++. But I would also investigate

using

a softer language. C++ is for high-performance situations, and GUIs only
need to respond in user-time. And softer languages like Python, Ruby,
Smalltalk, etc. support "block closures". They make GUI events absurdly

easy

to code, whereas C++ makes them absurdly hard.

That's the main reason Java is a poor language for GUIs. To compete with
C++, Java did not start with any advanced OO concepts, just _some_ aspects
of C++-style static typing. So yet another irony of our industry is the
majority of GUI projects are written in languages promoted as being good

for

GUIs when they are actually very bad!

--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!

Why swing is poor architecture? i think swing is very easy to use, and
all its components are OO concept. I know some people saying swing is
slow, but it is nothing to do with swing, it is the performance problem
of the VM, not the problem of the GUI library itself.

In swing, you will never get a segmentation fault, everything is
neither working or not-working. Java is a very safety langauge, unlike
c++, some code look like working, but will generate a segmentation
fault after running a long time.

I want to avoid this in the GUI library, but not very clear how i can
do it :(
thanks
from Peter

You don't see segmentation faults very much in the Java/SWING environment
because they
are often trapped.. The same thing can be done in C++ to stop segV's
although that's
a bad practice since it hides the underlying problem, resulting in incorrect
behavior.