Michael Emmel-
Thank you for your reply and offer!
Michael Emmel wrote:
> The Swing would be a kickass toolkit if they threw the Awt crap out
> the window.
Would it be possible to reimplement Swing without AWT?
I (obviously) don't have a good understanding of any of the issues
involved. How I wish I could get a brain dump from you. (Most of my
GUI experience is with use interface design for CAD and illustration
programs.)
How this originally came up was a concern I was parroting about
threading/concurrency issues in Sun's JDK/JRE. I don't know enough to
ask intelligent questions, but I wanted to learn if this was a design or
an implementation issue, as well as whether or not the issue poses a
risk to GNU's Classpath.
Another issue is the effort of supporting AWT on top of numerous native
GUIs. Idle speculation suggests that "lightweight" widgets may reduce
effort and perhaps even improve robustness and consistency.
The distinction between peerless and lightweight is important (and
confusing for novices like me). Let me see if I get this right:
Peerless means there's no matching underlying window handle/context;
lightweight means the widget is drawn in Java, not by the underlying
native GUI. So it's possible to have lightweight widgets with peers,
which is how you described Kaffe's current AWT implementation.
---
Blue Sky for a moment: What would be the ideal design and implementation
solution of AWT and Swing/JFC? (Talk slow, because some of us are still
kind of dense. <grin>)
Cheers, Jason
