Re: Java Versus gtk

[Michael L Torrie <torriem chem byu edu>]

On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 12:22, Michael L Torrie wrote:
> Have you considered Java with SWT (which is GTK-based on linux) or Java
> with straight GTK bindings.  Or C#/GTK#?  I think these are also other
> valid choices.

Also I should have added that they are portable too, available on
Windows and Linux (even C#/GTK# is on linux and windows both)

> Michael
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 00:59, Gus Koppel wrote:
> > "John J. Boyer" wrote:
> >
> > > I'm considering a project which will run on multiple platforms. To
> > > begin with, it should run on both Windows and Linux. Now I know about
> > > the development package from Dropline and mingw. Since Java will also
> > > run on multiple platforms, what are the advantages and disadvantages
> > > of using Java versus gtk+?
> >
> > Let me try to put it in a tabular way (to be viewed using a non-
> > proportional font):
> >
> > +-------------------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
> > | Item                          | GTK+      | QT        | Java/Swing|
> > +-------------------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
> > | Native language               | C         | C++       | Java      |
> > | Language bindings             | Various   | Various   | Various   |
> > | Related desktop project       | Gnome     | KDE       | -         |
> > | Main platforms                | UnxWinMac | UnxWinMac | UnxWinMac |
> > | Integrated Developm. Envirs.  | -         | o         | +         |
> > | Sourcecode portability        | +         | +         | +         |
> > | Binary portability            | -         | -         | +         |
> > | Object oriented programming   | +         | +         | +         |
> > | Execution speed               | +         | +         | -         |
> > | Resource consumpt./requirem.  | +         | +         | -         |
> > | Non-GUI-related function sets | +         | +         | +         |
> > | Complexity / ease to learn    | +         | o         | o         |
> > | License                       | LGPL      | QPL/Troll | Sun       |
> > | License costs                 | +         | + / -     | +         |
> > | Freedom offered by license    | +         | - / -     | +         |
> > +-------------------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
> >
> > Some of the ratings may be arguable. "+" means favourably, "-" means
> > detrimental, "o" means in between. I think the table should be mostly
> > accurate though I don't guarantee for it. Corrections or important
> > extensions are welcome. Anyway, it may assist in making a decision
> > which toolkit / language is best suited for the given needs.
> >
> > Importance or relevance of the factors may be different for you, so
> > don't just count "+"s and "-"s. I.e., if high execution speed or lower
> > resource consumption is of any importance to you, then Java is mostly
> > out of the game already. If on the other hand "comfortable" developping
> > is more important to you than the resulting execution performance, GTK+
> > may lose, due to its lack of a full featured IDE. However, this doesn't
> > mean that no full featured applications can be written for GTK+. Many
> > people (like me) actually prefer using some more basic tools over one
> > mega-IDE application.
> >
> > Java is the only language that provides portability on its binaries
> > and not only the source code. However, don't overestimate this factor.
> > It's of little importance for end users since most users likely use one
> > architecture at a time only. For the developer, lack of binary
> > portability basically just means an extra compilation per platform, but
> > no further significant development effort (if properly programmed). If
> > you intend to write non-GPL-like software (closed source and / or
> > commercial) then the licenses are important as well.
> > _______________________________________________
> > gtk-app-devel-list mailing list
> > gtk-app-devel-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
-- 
Michael L Torrie <torriem chem byu edu>