It might have flown under your radar, but with the release of Java 9, Oracle delivered the biggest wakeup call yet to Swing users. The release notes for Java 9 give mixed signals on the future for deployment options for Java desktop applications, and as you might guess, the worst news is in the finest print. The deprecation was announced well in advance in JEP and various blog posts. It pays to whip out your microscope and comb through the finer print of the JDK 9 release notes because the advice to migrate to Java Web Start turns out to be actually false. The deprecation announcement is crucial information for applet and desktop application users to bear in mind as they consider their options.
But well, it is so I will have to consider this. This is how the Java's second implementation implementation, Swing, works. Native components use memory allocated on Swing vs swt native heap, not only on the Java heap. Since Java 1. You don't see Eclipse hanging and Swing vs swt UI going completely blank whilst its compiling. Although primitive widgets such as buttons are a necessity, there are some components think JFileChooser that are composed of such primitives. In doing this, they discarded some features which were available on some platforms, but not others.
Masturbation with may girlfriends shoes. Search This Blog
Active 5 years, 6 months ago. Another nice framework could be Swing vs swt and a nice Swing vs swt of components' is pivot swing. First, I will readily concede that it is not valid to compare Eclipse, a development platform, with Swing, a GUI toolkit. NET MonoGame. Hence developers need to be careful while programming in multi-threaded environment about not to call the Swing methods in different threads other than Event Dispatcher Thread. Popular Posts. MonoGame Xamarin. Unknown, native Macintosh Toolbox. For example, in addition to selling separate analysis tools for the stock, bond, and derivative markets, an "Enterprise-level" tool that combines all three Sdt can easily be produced. This is the mainstream choice.
Programs that call SWT are portable, but the implementation of the toolkit, despite part of it being written in Java , is unique for each platform.
- I am using the Eclipse IDE.
- Native components?
- People never get things right on the first try, and Java's AWT was no exception to this rule.
People never get things right on the first try, and Java's AWT was no exception to this rule. One of the reasons that Java is so popular today is that this happened around the time of the web explosion, and Java via Applets were propelled to the fore with web browsers.
In order to provide the same windowing experience on a variety of different platforms, Sun took the common set of features from every platform e. Buttons and made them available in the AWT. In doing this, they discarded some features which were available on some platforms, but not others. Examples include progress bars, three-valued checkboxes, combo editable and drop-down lists and so forth.
The AWT was also built as a 'closed' system; you had exactly those components, and there were no others that could ever be added. As a result, the AWT was born into a cramped straitjacket from which it could never hope to escape. IBM actually solved this problem by devising a remote windowing protocol -- similar to VNC -- that would allow Applets to run on a mainframe but be displayed somewhere else.
There were some other technical problems that the AWT posed; for example, overlapping components were dodgy and the behaviours of the back-end were subtly different on different platforms.
There was nothing stopping them having multiple canvases overlapping if they wanted to implement it. Similarly, there's no reason why the AWT toolkit should have had to be constrained in terms of its implementation; instead of methods like createButtonPeer and createListPeer it would have been trivial to implement a parameterised createPeer method.
Instead, Sun solved the problem with Swing, which is a very heavy event-driven system in which all the graphics are drawn in Java. There's also the down-side of the app not looking like a 'real' OS application, because Sun wanted to push the Metal Look And Feel instead of defaulting to running like a real OS app.
The question is; why isn't it the default? But it's not all down to drawing speed; it's also down to how events are taken off the queue and processed. There's a single Thread pulling windowing events from the OS, and I'm betting that you've come across at least one app where the screen redraw freezes as it resolves a DNS name or waits for a file to become available.
In fact, the JVM is quite capable of knowing when threads and windows are open, and could take care of this automatically, but bad design resulted in this not being implemented. Another case of Not Invented Here? But I digress. There are some fundamental problems with AWT that over-constrained, and some of those important problems weren't fixed in Swing.
The performance issues aside, Swing is a capable GUI tool, but large Swing-based applications certainly don't feel as integrated into the OS as they could do. It wasn't a dig at Sun, and despite claims to the contrary Eclipse wasn't about keeping Sun out.
It's just they wanted to go their own way, and everyone else wanted to go with Eclipse. They've been offered a place to join in with Eclipse, but they're too busy with NetBeans to want to go. And, as James rightly says, it's good to have competition between the two, though I wouldn't go as far as wanting to standardise on the keystrokes. In actual fact, there are 4 different layers that make up Eclipse's UI:.
AWT covers both 1 and 2 above; you couldn't have one without the other. Swing on the other hand tried to straddle both 2 and 3 at the same time. It provided the basic components, and some combinations of them JFileChooser but with a limited repetoire. And there's nothing that Sun produce that come close to the integration of the views and perspectives, which are a key part of the Eclipse Rich Client Project. Indeed, instead of focussing on just the low-level code and expecting developers to create standard applications , Eclipse has actually provided what Sun haven't -- a framework for building new applications.
The partitioning that the UI takes is both important, extensible and refreshing. For example, not all OSs will have a combo box, but for those systems, it's possible to write an emulation layer in Java, so it will still run the same.
There's even an Embedded Rich Client Project that aims to provide for developing applications for low-power devices. Since it's extensible, we aren't going to be locked into the same set of components that we have for years. Since Java 1. And it'll work the same on all platforms, except that it will be displayed by the platform, not drawn by hand or the JVM. You don't see Eclipse hanging and the UI going completely blank whilst its compiling.
On Mac OS X, the button still pulses gently whilst it's doing a checkout, and the progress bar animates. Run a Swing app on Mac OS X, and the progress bar is an ugly blue that doesn't animate and the button is a grim picture of a pulse locked in mid-step.
Arguably, the pulsing is an artistic feature that doesn't lend itself well to everyone, but Java apps are Different. Yes, it uses native OS components. It does that for performance, and to allow the VM to be doing useful things instead, like compiling code. But it's not hobbled like the AWT was implemented, and it's extensible to new widgets as they evolve. And it looks and feels like a real application; it doesn't look and feel like a Java application. IBM's decision to implement SWT was based on three issues: They needed something that operated like, not just looked like, the custom OS They needed to deal with event queues properly, so that a hanging application thread didn't kil the redraw They needed all the performance they could get when running a heavy process such as an IDE It wasn't a dig at Sun, and despite claims to the contrary Eclipse wasn't about keeping Sun out.
These map directly to OS-level objects; essentlially, a Java wrapper around a native component. The purpose of the extra layer means that if bugs are found e. To be honest, there's very little reason why skinnable apps is a good thing unless you talk to marketeers; but what do they know? About the only good one is the NapkinLAF , which allows you to pretend your app is a demo, unfinished version. JFace assemblage of multiple SWT components. Although primitive widgets such as buttons are a necessity, there are some components think JFileChooser that are composed of such primitives.
This is the purpose of JFace. As well as combining multiple features together e. As an example, there's a Tree component in SWT that you can use to display tree-oriented data, or there's a JTree JFace component that provides all the interactive selection and marking of a Tree UI that you could want.
Views, perspectives, and windows. Views are combined into Perspectives, and it's thus possible to configure Eclipse however you want it to look.
The partitioning that the UI takes is both important, extensible and refreshing. Below is a screenshot of the Progress view provided by the platform to track execution of background tasks. Ed" did, an Outlook-like "cool-bar" instead of a "toolbar" -- or you want the font on the preferences dialog to be a size larger -- my advice is to forget about it. If any application needs any of these components, it needs to be develop from scratch. Swing [closed] Ask Question. Newer Post Older Post Home.
Swing vs swt. The Plugin Model
Markers include a description and, optionally, locational information within the resource. Again, Swing provides no such framework. The Eclipse platform provides a robust preferences framework.
Sure we have java. With Swing, you would be left to code the front-end for user-configurable preferences yourself. The Eclipse help system is fully integrated with the plugin architecture of the platform. Plugins can contribute help to specific topics within the help system. A full featured status bar is standard issue with Eclipse-based applications.
With Swing, you have to roll your own. Eclipse provides an application development platform whereas Swing provides a graphical toolkit with very few of the trappings needed for serious application development.
It is inaccurate to claim, as "Mr. Can your organization justify this extra investment? I had a client that decided to write an application built on the Eclipse platform. By the time I arrived on the scene, several thousand lines of code from core JFace classes, such as TitleAreaDialog, had been copied and pasted into new classes.
Specifically, in the case of the TitleAreaDialog class, they wanted control over the background color of the dialog window which ought always to match the window settings of the user , and the height of the header area which, for the sake of application consistency ought to be left alone.
It is, therefore necessary to understand the implications of providing the amount of structure that Eclipse does. It is easy to build using the Eclipse platform. Enormous amounts of functionality can be delivered in weeks. But take this bit of advice: don't program against the grain in Eclipse.
Don't try to dismantle the framework and rebuild it to suit your tastes. So the height of the dialog header is 30 pixels instead of 35 -- or the cancel button for background tasks is red instead of mauve the boss wants -- or you want, as "Mr.
Ed" did, an Outlook-like "cool-bar" instead of a "toolbar" -- or you want the font on the preferences dialog to be a size larger -- my advice is to forget about it. Programming against the grain is so counterproductive in Eclipse and SWT that if your end-user requires extensive tweaking of the user interface, then I wholeheartedly recommend using Swing.
It will certainly provide you the desired flexibility -- only, expect to pay a heavy price in terms of productivity. Please send me feedback at my email account and I will post your comments here. Below is a small selection of comments I have received, that may further aid a reader's understanding of the concepts presented. I did not agree with your viewpoint in Swing vs. SWT article. The core SWT is weak. In my concept, SWT uses many shortcuts that make easy the development of small applications but implies limitations in complex enviroments example, a non fully implemented MVC model.
In this context, the Eclipse framework is a solution. For your article, I propose the title "Swing vs. Eclipse Framework" and, in this case, the comparsion sounds like "Davi vs. Ed stay correct in the original text. If you notice, the title of my article is "Swing vs. The question mark at the end denotes a question, in this case "Is such a comparison valid?
Therefore, your point, that the choice of "Swing vs. I have yet to see such a cohesive, widely used application development framework in the Swing community. The reason for the title was because this small article was a response to Mr. You're locked in to whatever is their default implementation of their GUI widgets. I make GUIs as part of my work and you can't imagine how often the clients come back with a huge list of GUI tweaks which, come to think about it, increases their productivity, hence have to be done.
Worst than the JRE 1. Not only that, but Mr. Ed adn you compare apple with oranges, i. As you can see, I tend to avoid tools that "lock me in", and I think this is an attitude that should be essential for all software engineers. That's why, from time to time, I do my Java development in jEdit and Emacs. All tools have their strength and weaknesses, but I still want to have a choice in the end. First, I will readily concede that it is not valid to compare Eclipse, a development platform, with Swing, a GUI toolkit.
However, when Mr. Ed slammed SWT in his article I felt that the focus of his commentary was itself misplaced. This was the point that I was trying to make in my article. Now, as you have mentioned, Netbeans is a platform similar to Eclipse that has been written using Swing, and what would really be useful is to compare the capabilities of these two in supporting business application development.
I concede this point, and I even made a brief reference to this fact in my article. In order to adress some of the other points you make, I want to provide you with a little bit of my own background. The Windows-only assumption also makes it possible for me to integrate Swing widgets directly into my Eclipse-based application when necessary, since Eclipse, post 3.
Practically speaking, however, I have nevery utilized this functionality for any products that I have delivered. You mentioned that your own clients generally come back asking for productivity enhancing tweaks to the user interface. I agree with you whole-heartedly that the productivity of the end user must be maximised and should never be sacrified. However, I have not, in my own experiences, come across a situation where enhancing the end user's productivity required custom-coded widgets or tweaks to button-height, font characteristics, and the like.
Perhaps you can provide me with one or two concrete examples from your own experience? Finally, you mentioned the gui4j library, and I did take a look at it. It looks to me like it improves productivity as far as constructing screens is concerned, and based on your comments, it seems like it also simplifies the controller tier of the application. However, these are only two parts of developing an entire application, and the Eclipse development platform goes far beyond this in terms of supporting application development.
In addition to the infrastructure provided by the base platform that I highlighted in my article e. I won't get into GEF, as the email is getting too long, but I've included the link in case you are interested. Such OS resources need to be explicitly de-allocated by invoking the dispose method.
As already said, an SWT program relies upon the native platform resources wrapped by the Display class, as we will see later on both in terms of allocated resources such as colors, images, and so on and as regards the event mechanism. As regards event handling, in SWT there is only one thread that is allowed to handle native user interface events.
We now see the basic structure of an SWT program. This will help us understand SWT's basic architecture. Instances of the Display class are responsible for managing the connections between SWT and the underlying operating system, enforcing the SWT models for colors or images, for example. The Shell class instead represents windows managed by the platform-dependent desktop manager. Listing 1 shows this typical mechanism.
To fully understand the code in Listing 1, one should understand the readAndDispatch method of the Display class. Such a method reads an event from the operating system's event queue, dispatching it appropriately.
It returns true if there is additional work to do, or false if the caller can sleep until another event is placed on the event queue. The loop at lines in Listing 1 is typical of SWT applications. It takes care of forwarding all underlying platform events to the SWT application until the shell is disposed and the program can exit the event loop.
Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which QuinStreet receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. QuinStreet does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.
Email Article Print Article. Which topic are you interested in? Data Storage. IT Management. What is your company size? What is your job title? What is your job function?
Swing or SWT when using WindowBuilder - Research Reflections
Post a Comment. The Tree of Knowledge. Posted by Mohit Gupta on Saturday, January 19, All three can be used to develop the desktop applications. Now the question is, which one to use and when? Each of these has its own pros and cons. In this article, we shall try to understand the pros and cons of each of these. It comes with standard Java packaging and hence no specific installations are required.
This is the simplest form of GUI toolkit, where Java provide basic set of components, layout managers, events etc to design the desktop application. This means, AWT directly utilizes the GUI control features set provided by host and is entirely dependent on this for available features. That is why it is called Heavyweight components library. As all the host does not support all the UI control, Sun decided to provide the least common denominator from all the UI controls available on different hosts.
This means that AWT is having very limited set of controls and even lacks the generally required components nowadays like Tree, Table etc. If any application needs any of these components, it needs to be develop from scratch.
That is a big task to develop the components which are quite commonly required in all kind of applications. Various positive points of AWT are: It is very stable toolkit It is thread safe, which means it can work well in multi-threaded environment also.
It disposes the controls automatically, so application need not to worry about it. UI in AWT can be created in any sequence using bottom up or top down i.. Negative points are:. As it uses host UI controls for representation of the components, it is dependent on host for the look and feel of components. That means, we can not ensure same look and feel across the platforms. Hence it fails the main motive of java to 'write once and run everywhere' WORE.
As mentioned above, availability of various components is also limited due to availability of controls with various hosts. AWT UIs don't provide accessibility support. AWT is thread safe, but this feature comes at a cost of performance. Access needs to be synchronized. Swing is built by using the basic constructs from AWT; like it uses its event model and basic classes. Swing overcome this shortcoming by providing lightweight components all defined in Java memory space and having complete control on their features, and rendering mechanism.
This eliminates the dependency of components on host. Now developers can give any look and feel to the components and that can be same across the platforms. Feature set is also not limited to host but is defined by programmers using Java and hence carry great potential.
With these changes, it open a new arena of Swing component development with many and many components coming with Swing and from custom libraries also; all written purely in Java - carrying WORE principle.
This was the major achievement for Swing. Here are the pros for Swing: A lightweight component library all developed in Java.
Now one model can support multiple views. A good support for accessibility Introduced the concept of renderer and editors for various components like Table, Tree etc. It also helps in performance improvement using flyweight pattern.
Swing is not thread safe. Hence developers need to be careful while programming in multi-threaded environment about not to call the Swing methods in different threads other than Event Dispatcher Thread.
If it is not followed, behavior can be quite unpredictable as multiple threads would be doing the UI update without synchronization. This design is intentional to improve the performance. Thread safety comes at the cost of performance by making flows synchronized for threads access. Swing remove this and change the design to work in single thread model. With these description, and their pros and cons; every technology has its own place. One can choose as per her requirement.
People who read this post also read :. Bookmark this post:. Newer Post Older Post Home. Search This Blog. Follow by Email. VedantaTree on Facebook. Popular Posts. Vedic Math - Square roots. Vedic Math - Base Multiplication. Vedic Math - Cube of 2 Digit Numbers. Vedic Math - Square Root Vedic Math - Base Multiplication Part Vedic Math - Multiplication of numbers whose last digits add to 10 and first digits are same and vice-versa.