SWT is slow, Was: D : Not for me anymore
terminal.node at gmail.com
Mon Oct 23 13:53:34 PDT 2006
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:49:07 -0700, John Reimer <terminal.node at gmail.com>
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:59:08 -0700, Jari-Matti Mäkelä
> <jmjmak at utu.fi.invalid> wrote:
>> There was at least some discussion in Slashdot over two years ago:
>> "First off, SWT only performes well on windows, and stack on top of that
>> that the principal native abstractions are taylored to a win32
>> environment. Based off of that it is easy to see how SWT performes quite
>> nicely on Windows.
>> Elsewhere it sucks. MacOS, GTK, photon, Motif. Even porrly writeen swing
>> programs outperform on those platforms."
> Again, your quote refers to Java SWT: perhaps there might be an element
> of truth there, yet it looks more to me like prejudice since I've not
> experienced the speed deficit issue (although, I agree that it's big and
> slow to load, however). DWT performs quite spritely from what I've seen
> in a couple of projects. The size of the code is more alarming to me
> than anything else (the executables grow to a couple megabytes).
Okay, it occurred to me that I missed the whole point completely: the
fellow was talking about SWT on win32 performing great (which is what DWT
is at the moment). So I really made no sense here since a DWT is not
available yet on other platforms to prove that it also could perform
well... disregard my statement. But I still hold that I think SWT isn't
so bad as he makes out on other platforms. I don't fully understand what
he means (note that I've only ever used SWT on linux and win32, though).
More information about the Digitalmars-d