Hi Fabrizio, I had the same reaction to the code generated by Matisse for event listeners -- too many innerclasses. But they added an option you can set on the form itself (select the top-level designed form, and look at its properties) which lets you control the code generation. You can choose between the default (one innerclass per interface), having a single action dispatch class (my preferred approach), and having the form itself directly implement the listener interfaces (which is what I used to do, but this has the disadvantage of leaking your implementation through to others and possibly accidentally overriding inherited methods. Oh @New, where are you?)
-- Tor On Jul 24, 10:42 am, Fabrizio Giudici <[email protected]> wrote: > TorNorbye wrote: > > GroupLayout by itself is extremely hard to use. BUT, it was built with > > toolability in mind - and when used with NetBeans it works well. > > > I don't think anyone developing UIs should be writing layout code by > > hand. > > My personal experience is: I had a great enthusiasm when I first faced > with UI design tools, and it was circa 1997/1998 after hearing some > presentation about VisualCafe. After using it for a few months, I > completely gave up with visual designers and stayed with code for > several years. Even JBuilder didn't satisfy me (in spite of being a > great tool for that time in other respects) and every time I tried a new > visual designer I backed off after a few days. I had a big negative bias > when Matisse come out, but I later changed my mind and I'm fine with it. > I think it's mostly subjective, but GUIs are a visual thing and I find > that the most natural way to design them is with a visual tool. I think > that the programmatic approach is still popular because we are > programmers, but as the melting pot with visual designers that is being > created by Flex, JavaFX and Silverlight grews, the visual approach will > get more and more popular. > > BTW, I'm pretty fine with creating GUIs with Matisse that resize > themselves when needed. The tool has got sometimes rough edges, but with > a bit of experience you manage them perfectly. I can't see the missing > 10% effect with Matisse, and I'd like whether people arguing about it > would elaborate more with some example (it might be that they design > much more complex GUIs than me). > > If there's a critic to Matisse is that, if used in brainless mode, it > tends to generate bloated controller code in the same class (e.g. by > generating listeners by double clicking on a button or such). But it's > just a matter of discipline of the programmer - as usual, for having a > good design. > > -- > Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager > Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." > weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici -www.tidalwave.it/blog > [email protected] - mobile: +39 348.150.6941 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
