Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #30391
| From | "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Could this be done better |
| Date | 2014-11-24 22:49 +1100 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <m4v61d$f6t$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <87zjbg97c5.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> |
"Cecil Westerhof" wrote in message news:87zjbg97c5.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl... > I have mostly programmed back-ends. But I now want also to do some > front-end programming. > > I wrote the following simple program. It does nothing useful, it just > displays a description in different colours with the colour appended > to the description. > > I was just wondering if this could be done better. Yes - use JavaFX instead of Swing. JavaFX is the *official* GUI toolkit for use with Java applications as stated by Oracle themselves. Swing is deprecated (though not in the pure Java sense) in that it is not getting any love (updates, bug fixes, new features) and never will. Java developers should only use Swing if they have to modify an existing application or write a new one that works with existing frameworks that happen to be Swing-based. Otherwise, use JavaFX. Don't look back. -- And loving it, -Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct) _________________________________________________ Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com [Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-24 12:16 +0100
Re: Could this be done better "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2014-11-24 22:49 +1100
Re: Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-24 17:54 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Knute Johnson <eternal@knutejohnson.com> - 2014-11-24 09:37 -0800
Re: Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-24 19:27 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2014-11-24 09:23 -0500
Re: Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-24 17:45 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2014-11-24 13:42 -0500
Re: Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-25 00:12 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Knute Johnson <eternal@knutejohnson.com> - 2014-11-24 09:19 -0800
Re: Could this be done better Knute Johnson <eternal@knutejohnson.com> - 2014-11-24 09:41 -0800
Re: Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-25 00:55 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2014-11-25 00:11 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Knute Johnson <eternal@knutejohnson.com> - 2014-11-24 16:26 -0800
Re: Could this be done better Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2014-11-25 19:58 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2014-11-25 14:36 -0500
Re: Could this be done better Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2014-11-26 01:58 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2014-11-26 08:48 -0500
Re: Could this be done better Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2014-11-29 19:43 +0100
Re: Could this be done better Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2014-11-29 15:44 -0500
Re: Could this be done better Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2014-11-29 15:47 -0500
csiph-web