RE: RE: [platform-swt-dev] org.eclipse.swt.SWT

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Erik Poupaert
>
> Why not write the wrapper? There seem to be at least one project (SWEET)
> doing so.

Not my job.  I don't bask in the glory of devkudos.  I work for a living.
I'm your end user, not your beta tester.


> None of this is stopping people from using SWT. If SWT is
> considered "hard",
> it will be for the same reasons AWT and Swing are considered "hard", while
> Visual Basic is considered "easy".

Perhaps I've not done a good job of explaining myself.  IMO, Swing is easier
to use than SWT because Swing has a more mature API.


> There is perhaps a strong demand for tools that enable these
> programmers to
> drag & drop non-descript widgets onto a form, double-click them and then
> copy & paste SQL from a QueryByExample tool into the event handlers.

Hardly.  I can't stand visual programming.  I started out writing operating
systems on Intel processors, and I think the trend towards black box
programming has dumbed down the development pool.  But at the same time, a
long learning curve is antithetical to broad acceptance, and SWT's learning
curve is just too long right now because it's so non-standard.


> I'm sure you're right, but I was attracted by SWT because it was not like
> that. It's a bit rough on the edges, but the sourcebase is small and
> understandable, while being potent enough to carry the weight of something
> like Eclipse.

Yeah, but at what cost?  I'm still not sure what the "right" way is to tell
my window to repaint itself when I change the contents of a label.  And I'm
by no means a lightweight; I make my living writing and selling commercial
Java software.

Joe