Hi, Naturally I'm a bit biased :-)
1. Programming-Style and Tools: ------------------------------- Well both of them have pros and cons. I like the typesafety and the perfect IDE-Integration of Java (Codecompletion, Refactoring Support, Debugging-Support, ...) in Eclipse, Netbeans, IDEA, ... which though is available to some extend for JavaScript too but not at Level Java. On the otherhand JavaScript has nice things like first-class function support (a function is a real language construct) allowing you to program in a more functional-programming paradigm, dynamic function arguments and other nice stuff, auto-type conversion - well it is a scripting language :-) IMHO the real difference is not in how you interface with qooxdoo but how your own programm-logic is structured and maintainable. If you structure your JavaScript code appropriately this is not impossible but IMHO harder than if you code in Java. 2. Backend-Integration: ----------------------- GWT comes with an advanced RPC-System which frees you from all the serialization/deserialization stuff of even nested object graphs with references not easily doable with JSON. Still interfacing with JSON is supported by QxWT because it simply wraps the JSON-Store or you could use the GWT built-in JSON support. We are currently also working on new cool features for QxWT inconjunction with Eclipse Technologies like EMF and Hibernate which will allow you generate generic editors directly from your domain model but we in the planning stage at the moment. I know that there are qooxdoo backends available as well but I because I never used them I can't say how good they are and which features they provide. 3. Community: ------------- qooxdoo as well as GWT have a vibrant community you can ask questions and get support. QxWT is quite young (first release in December 2009) but because QxWT tried to stay as close to qooxdoo-API as possible fairly ALL available online resources and examples can applied 1:1 to QxWT. If you look at the various GWT-UI-Toolkits (GXT and SmartGWT come to my mind) you might see that the other comparable solutions don't provide all features for free like qooxdoo and QxWT do and will do in future! Tom BTW QxWT since the last release also leverages the qooxdoo-toolchain to create an application optimized before deployment even this difference to a plain qooxdoo-Application has been gone on this front as well. Sakesun Roykiattisak schrieb: > Does that implied that you believe coding in java (GWT) is better than > direct javascript ? > > Just want to hear an opinion from someone who proficient in both. > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Tom Schindl >> Sent: 04/07/10 12:31 PM >> To: qooxdoo Development >> Subject: Re: [qooxdoo-devel] Comparison, GWK or Qooxdoo? >> > That's exactly why I created QxWT. > > Tom > > Am 07.04.10 03:31, schrieb Simon Bull: >> For what it's worth, it looks like GWT doesn't yet have the same level >> of theme and widget richness as Qooxdoo, so we've decided to stick with >> Qooxdoo on our project. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > qooxdoo-devel mailing list > qooxdoo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list qooxdoo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
