Comment by javajosh | Hacker News Reader

Comment by javajosh | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This is a good question. It seems like Cappucino is targeted squarely at Cocoa developers looking to do web development without retooling, just as GWT is targeted toward Java Swing developers looking to do the same thing. This can't be a large target audience. (And I imagine that the few hard-core users would probably be willing (and able) to pay something for it.)

(Haven't we all sort of agreed that the best way to do UI is largely declarative, and then we wire things together with a selector based library? Why go through the pain of having to write code just to describe static UI resources?)

Disclaimer: I'm involved with the Cappuccino project

It's more targeted at a specific niche, the far end of the static website -> web application spectrum. So it's not a large audience, but for its target audience it does it exceptionally well.

This is exactly what you do in Interface Builder, although its visual.

Programming with GWT is nothing like swing. Nothing.

Oh really.

I've programmed both. Have you?

Let's see if you can tell which of these snippets is GWT and which is Swing (I've renamed JButton to Button to not make it trivially easy for you):

    Button b = new Button("Click me", new ClickHandler() {
      public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
        //do something
      }
    });

vs

    Button b = new Button("Click Me");
    b.addActionListener(new ActionListener(){
        void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e){
            //do something
        }
    });

The first is unidiomatic GWT, the latter is swing. I can count the times I've set up a button with a click handler without UIBinder on one hand. So I'll assume based on your post that you always instantiated buttons that way since you never learned how to use GWT beyond how to run the compiler.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com