Re: SWT or Swing?
Ramon F Herrera wrote:
On Dec 31, 5:35 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
Ramon F Herrera wrote:
The Swing designers and apologists are quick to blame its faults on
"bad programmers" but they never say that the Swing successes are
attributable to "good programmers" but to "good design on our part"
instead.
Citations?
--
Lew
Just go a couple of postings back in this thread, Lew:
[Joe Attardi:]
"This is not what makes Swing applications crappy, IMHO. It's when a
Swing programmer does not properly work with the event dispatching
thread, running long-running tasks on it. This causes the GUI to feel
slow and unresponsive."
I hope you are not going to ask me for citations about Java success
being the inescapable result of "good design". Those citations are
left as an exercise. :-)
-Ramon
ps: You may replace "Java" for "Swing" above.
You cite someone pointing out that crappy programming makes Swing programs
bad, sure. But you haven't shown that Joe Attardi is either a Swing designer
or a Swing apologist. (Let alone substituting "Java" for "Swing" above.) You
failed to show that his comment isn't justified. You failed to show that he
was "quick to blame its faults", both by not showing that it was Swing's
faults that he was addressing, and that he was being "quick" instead of
deliberating long and carefully. You also failed to show that this is a
general pattern, instead citing only one person who is neither designer, nor
apologist, nor incorrect in his assessment, nor quick to reach his
conclusions. Your claim was general: that the designers (plural) and
apologists (plural) do this behavior. Where is your evidence?
Oh, you don't have any.
Yes, I am going to ask you for citations about Java success being the
inescapable result of "good design". You made an outrageous claim, and you
leave it up to *us* "as an exercise"? Come on!
You need to back up your own assertions with your own evidence. I assert that
you won't find it.
Now put up or shut up.
--
Lew