not being a programmer perhaps I should be quite, but I never do that. +10 for swing, here is why: 1: it is there 2: it is good enough 3: doing the bare minimum you are signing up for a large amount of work, don't sign up for more. 4: people who build new gui libs usually have their own ideas how things should work, often incompatible ideas. 5: there is someone else who wants to work with you on this.
1 is very important, if your users must install custom packages you will have to answer a lot of emails and write good docs instead of doing fun stuff. you do not want to be supporting skeedo linux, HP-UX .... . if your doing swing support is install java 1.5 or better. but with that said +1 Tk, marc On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Luke VanderHart <luke.vanderh...@gmail.com> wrote: > My side project is a fairly complex GUI application written in > Clojure. Recently, I've become irritated with using Java interop for > everything. It's not that Clojure doesn't have nice java interop - it > does. It's just that when interacting with a GUI framework, which is a > large part of my app, I have to be back in mutable object-oriented > land, worrying about class hierarchies, mutable state, locks, etc. > Yucky. > > So, with a perhaps dangerous lack of sanity and without any guarantee > of success, I've decided to try my hand at writing an idiomatic > Clojure GUI library. If I have success (which I doubt) I will of > course make it available as open source. > > I intend for it to be mostly declarative, with a nice DSL for defining > GUI elements. Each component will also implement map, and use one of > Clojure's reference types as an interface for inspecting / updating > its state. I may also implement some aspects of Functional Reactive > Programming wherever it's convenient to do so. > > What you all must help me decide is what GUI framework to use as the > underpinnings of it. It's genuinely hard to decide. I have at least > some experience with all of them, so I have no strong preference, but > I'd like to get your input. I did consider trying to make it abstract > enough that you could plug in *any* of them under the hood, but > there's enough differences between the frameworks that that would get > very ugly very fast. > > Possibilities are: > > AWT > Pros: native widgets, bundled with Java, low-level > Cons: few widgets, considered somewhat obselete > > Swing > Pros: bundled with Java, good widget selection > Cons: non-native widgets > > SWT > Pros: native widgets, widely used > Cons: requires platform-specific libs > > QT Jambi > Pros: native widgets, huge widget selection, highly-regarded framework > Cons: requires platform-specific libs, writing custom widgets is > hairy, momentum and support seem to be lagging since Nokia dropped > official support. > > Remember, the actual API won't matter - that will be completely > abstracted away. So try to focus on the framework's look and feel. > Also let me know if I've missed any of the framework's key > characteristics. > > Thanks! > > -Luke > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your > first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -- Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better. --Albert Camus The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. --Margaret Thatcher -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
