Comments on: JRuby can save Swing

By: Sergio

Sergio — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:03:00 +0000

I think you are right ! But the problem is not Swing or Java itself but the lack of an application framework. I agree, Swing is just a low level API for graphical widget. Without a framework that defines the Application concept, without a true well integrated databinding mechanism, action framework…is really hard to build a real word GUI application (especially data-centric ones).
But i think there is no need to use something different from Java. If you take a look on how a very old product (but for building desktop applications IMHO allready the best one) like Borland Delphi (and especially the VCL framework) works you can see that all Delphi does can easilly be reproduced with Java.
The Delphi’s strength is the VCL framework, the Ruby strength is the Rails framework, Java is a good language and a very powerfull architecture, just a good GUI application framework is needed.

By: Julian Doherty

Julian Doherty — Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:56:00 +0000

anon - I liked Daniel Spiewak’s reply, and I’ve posted a response to that and some other replies at JRuby Can Save Swing - Follow Up

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 23:02:00 +0000

What did you think of Daniel Spiewak’s blog on the matter? http://blogs.dzone.com/daniel/
2007/02/21/does-swing-need-saving

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 12:18:00 +0000

Swing’s learning curve isn’t anymore steeper than learning html, ajax framework of the week, css, javascript + dom and a little bit of flash.

People poo poo about Swing, but really I don’t see web app developers poo pooing about all the toolkits necessary to build web ui’s. I agree that higher level stuff is great; but to be an ‘expert’, I think that the learning curve is a given to master all the internals + guts of any technology.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:30:00 +0000

clearly Java is perfect language for Swing, because Swing was designed for Java. It is powerful, but it’s easy to build and wrap an intermediate framework around Swing. This can be done in a week or two, and i have done it myself quite a few times, for each project/client. We are just now starting to see new Swing frameworks (eg. jmatter, genesis, jsr296) and this trend will continue, in addition to the RCPs of Netbeans and Eclipse.

By: paawak

paawak — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 12:32:00 +0000

Julian, I do empathise with you. You remind of the days when I was learning to code in Swings. Your arguments are valid and I do agree its not for an average programmer to create a Awing App out of the box. And that goes a long way to explain why Swings has been a total failure. But I would also like to add Swings is a very powerful framework and not that cumbersome once you get used to it. But if recent trends are to be believed, there is a definite upwards swing for Swings.

By: Julian Doherty

Julian Doherty — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 07:03:00 +0000

steve - I have to admit I haven’t used the Eclipse or Netbeans RCP projects. It seems to be that they both suffer from the Java “put it in a container, make it endlesly configurable with XML” design style. That works a lot of the time, but there is also value to Rails “convention over configuration” approach.

The other reason is that if you’re using Eclipse or Netbeans RCP, you’re working in Java. Java is heavy and verbose code. Sometimes you need the type checking and performance, but a lot of the time (for a simple GUI), a dynamic and more relaxed language like Ruby can be more productive.

anon - (I’m not that familiar with Groovy either.). True, Groovy could work. From what I can tell though you just get a nicer way of writing the same old Swing.

fsilber - A tool for creating usable GUI components? I’d call that Swing ;). Seriously though, I’d envisage that Swing is the low level that advanced developers would create the building blocks in. A framework like I’m talking about here would just make it easier to use them.

daniel - Swing is easy once you’re up to speed, but it’s got a steep learning curve, and even when you know what you’re doing, things still take longer than they should. I figure you should be able to do the same things easier, and in less time with Ruby.

By: daniel

daniel — Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:27:00 +0000

Gosh… I find Swing the easiest and nicest part of Java. Yeah it’s almost always too verbose but it just makes a lot of sense to me. Especially considering how flexible it is. I find I can just code off the reference documentation. It’s the other commonly used stuff in Java like the various ORMs that just drive me crazy. However, it’s true that a nice JRuby swing could be simply… incredible.

By: fsilber

fsilber — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:22:00 +0000

Is Swing hard? Many tools may make it easier to craft a “one-of” application form, but what tool makes it easier for the average programmer to create and re-use one’s own application-oriented higher-level GUI components?

By: Mago_Ged

Mago_Ged — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 07:29:00 +0000

Quote mr.Anonymous. Groovy already has most of this: try SwingBuilder.
I take chance to say that java is the most fortunate thing could ever happen to ruby…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:06:00 +0000

Blech, JRuby.

Groovy already has a SwingBuilder, which I suppose you could duplicate in Ruby… but most of these are done arleady.

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:58:00 +0000

I agree with the sentiment, but not to craft yet another solution.

Why don't we just call this Eclipse or NetBeans RCP?

Really these things have been done, what we lack is people understanding and using them.

There is a JSR on the table for a Swing framework too - JSR-296, this will help quite a bit.