Swing seems like a proof of concept UI toolkit. SWT just seems a bit more polished and easier to develop, working apps.
That is just an opinion and I like that Swing is built-in. On May 27, 8:13 pm, Antony Blakey <antony.bla...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28/05/2010, at 9:21 AM, Armando Blancas wrote: > > >> Remember, the actual API won't matter - that will be completely > >> abstracted away. So try to focus on the framework's look and feel. > >> Thanks! > >> -Luke > > > SWT, because of the native look and feel. I really don't like the > > looks of Swing. As a user of some Swing app, I don't find solace from > > thinking how convenient it was for the programmers to deliver that > > thing to me. As a developer, dealing with the packaging/deployment > > just comes with the job and the results, I think, are well worth the > > effort. > > +1 SWT. I think arguments that focus on the ease of deployment are misguided > because an app is *used* far more times than it is deployed, so one really > should focus on the quality of the end application. In any case, deployment > and packaging for different platforms is easy to automate. > > Antony Blakey > -------------------------- > CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd > Ph: 0438 840 787 > > The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the > intelligent are full of doubt. > -- Bertrand Russell -- 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
