good wysiwyg editor?

java-programmer, good wysiwyg editor? Hello,

knows someone a good and easy to use wysiwyg editor for gui creating in
java? Or is it better to selfCode?

thanks for help

Patrick

java-programmer >> good wysiwyg editor? selfCoding is a MUST!
Patrick Kr黰pelmann wrote:

> Hello,
>
> knows someone a good and easy to use wysiwyg editor for gui creating in
> java? Or is it better to selfCode?
>
> thanks for help
>
> Patrick
>

java-programmer >> good wysiwyg editor? Try NetBeans (http://www.netbeans.org). It has about the best GUI editor
I've seen.

If you enjoy coding in binary, writing PostScript files by hand or
creating your Word documents by hand-generating RTF then a GUI editor
probably isn't for you. :-)

Patrick Kr黰pelmann wrote:

> Hello,
>
> knows someone a good and easy to use wysiwyg editor for gui creating in
> java? Or is it better to selfCode?
>
> thanks for help
>
> Patrick
>

java-programmer >> good wysiwyg editor? Rob Ratcliff wrote:
> Try NetBeans (http://www.netbeans.org). It has about the best GUI editor
> I've seen.
>
> If you enjoy coding in binary, writing PostScript files by hand or
> creating your Word documents by hand-generating RTF then a GUI editor
> probably isn't for you. :-)

That's a bit overstated. It's quite possible that a GUI editor could be
a helpful tool despite its limitations, but there are limitations. Most
significantly, Java is designed for graphical interfaces to be describe
logically, rather than by pixels. It's only when you want to place
controls with exact numbers of pixels that a GUI editor becomes a must.
For example, that's why it's difficult to get by without the things in
Microsoft development environments. When you want to place controls
logically, a description in code is often as easy to create as a GUI in
an editor.

That doesn't mean I don't think such tools can be useful, but I do think
that they often create a desire to use pixel placement of controls from
people who ought to know better. The ones I've seen are very poor at
making it apparent that you're working with a dynamic, moving, resizing,
adjustable user interface, and not just a picture.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

java-programmer >> good wysiwyg editor? On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:02:19 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:

>That doesn't mean I don't think such tools can be useful, but I do think
>that they often create a desire to use pixel placement of controls from
>people who ought to know better. The ones I've seen are very poor at
>making it apparent that you're working with a dynamic, moving, resizing,
>adjustable user interface, and not just a picture.
>

The GUI Builder of JBuilder also support gridbaglayout, where you don't
(need) to position by pixel. The generated code is also very readible and
can be modified by hand (after which you can still use the gui builder).
It gives to power of Gridbaglayout while still being easy.

--
Gerbrand van Dieijen

WWW: http://twisted.warande.net
ICQ: 19345450

java-programmer >> good wysiwyg editor? Hi Rob,

Rob wrote:
> I think that many of the experienced programmers tend to
> take the elitist attitude that the only way to do
> it "right" is to hand code it, even if it takes them
> twice as long or more.

Well, sometimes that's entirely the right decision; depends on what your
requirements and delivery schedule look like, I suppose. But that
wasn't the point. Read on for where I get to the point.

> but when doing complex form layouts
> I think a good visual tool is invaluable.

It depends on the form layout. I certainly don't enjoy writing
GridBagLayout code by hand, and if I had to do a lot of it, I would
definitely do something to avoid the brute force approach. As I see it,
"something" could include any of:

1. Change the GUI design approach.
2. Build a more appropriate abstraction on top of GridBagLayout, and use
that instead of writing code for GridBagLayout directly.
3. Use a tool to do code generation.

In general, I favor options 1 and 2 over option 3. There are two
reasons: first, if I have trouble writing the code, I'm going to have
trouble reading it later; and second, if I had trouble writing the code
in a simple and logical way, the user is not going to know what to
expect in terms of visual behavior, because it's going to act neither
simple nor logical. I consider both of these negative points to a
design. Granted, they can be outweighed by other issues, but they are
still negative points to a design.

> BTW, I actually never use Null layout for any of my GUI building
> exercises using NetBeans or JBuilder. They both support Gridag layout
> and many of the others (Box, Border, Flow, etc.)

You can use whatever you like. I didn't say that GUI design tools don't
let you use layout managers; I said they encourage you to think in terms
of the static layout on the screen, not how the GUI reacts to different
sized controls, changes in screen size, etc. That stuff is an
afterthought, if anything at all. If you're using a layout manager but
dinking around with the interface in a GUI design tool to get things to
look "right", then you're still relying on seeing one particular static
view of a potentially very changeable and dynamic screen.

Again, that's not a necessary consequence of using a GUI tool, but it's
certainly the direction that the tools I've seen encourage. Very few
people, even when given the option, will use the design tool to look at
their interfaces with a variety of control sizes, languages (because of
differences in label size and proportion) and window sizes as they are
designing. Practically speaking, even those who wish to do so will have
a hard time getting current generations of design tools to accomodate
their desire.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

java-programmer >> good wysiwyg editor? Gerbrand van Dieijen wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:02:19 -0600, Chris Smith wrote:
> >That doesn't mean I don't think such tools can be useful, but I do think
> >that they often create a desire to use pixel placement of controls from
> >people who ought to know better. The ones I've seen are very poor at
> >making it apparent that you're working with a dynamic, moving, resizing,
> >adjustable user interface, and not just a picture.
>
> The GUI Builder of JBuilder also support gridbaglayout, where you don't
> (need) to position by pixel. The generated code is also very readible and
> can be modified by hand (after which you can still use the gui builder).
> It gives to power of Gridbaglayout while still being easy.

See my response to Rob. I wasn't talking about design using null
layouts. I was talking about tweaking designs for the specific window
size and shape, language, font size, control look and feel, etc. that is
used by default on the developer's machine. You can design like a
desktop publisher even using layout managers, and you can even become
very adept at coercing the layout manager to produce your pixel-perfect
designs, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

You may not do this, but it's rather commonplace.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation