in reply to HTML as a GUI: part 32,523rd

My opinion on (a) is that this is probably more trouble than it's worth. There's a huge push to make all UI "browser-based" -- but frankly, browsers aren't well designed for truly interactive GUIs and aren't all that compatible from platform to platform either, so you have compatibility issues no matter what you do. As I see it, the browser as interface has only a couple things going for it:

If you really need a more interactive GUI interface, then I think that java is the way to go since it was explicitly designed for the task of providing a platform independent gui. Yes, it has some quirks, too, but I think a lot fewer. And some version of it is also now likely to be installed on many modern systems. (E.g., Windows)

And for those of us who just can't give up perl -- which of course we don't want to do -- why not combine the two with Inline::Java. The 2003 Perl Advent Calendar has an article on Using Java as a perl GUI that shows how this might be done.

-xdg

Code posted by xdg on PerlMonks is public domain. It has no warranties, express or implied. Posted code may not have been tested. Use at your own risk.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: HTML as a GUI: part 32,523rd
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Apr 09, 2004 at 12:21 UTC
    There's a third benefit. In most complex programs, the engine is 10-20% of the code and the UI is 80-90%. Contrast that to most web applications, where the ratio is flipped. Flipping this ratio has another huge benefit - the LOC drops dramatically and time-to-market is cut in half (or more).

    By using the browser as a UI, all I (as the developer) have to do is generate well-formed DHTML. Since I'm targeting a platform (IE, NS, MZ, whatever), I can even tailor my code to that specific platform. If I want, I can play nice, but I don't have to. Since the code is installed on the user's machine, it's more acceptable for the code to be tailored to that specific setup.

    Yes, the goal is to flip the standard paradigm of DHTML. *shrugs*

    ------
    We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

    Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose

[reply]
Re: Re: HTML as a GUI: part 32,523rd
by hardburn (Abbot) on Apr 09, 2004 at 13:19 UTC

    browsers aren't well designed for truly interactive GUIs and aren't all that compatible from platform to platform either

    On the contrary, there are a lot of developments that make browsers great for interactive GUIs. The problem is that most of them are specific to the browser (ActiveX, XUL, JavaScript, etc.)

    Java is not the solution here. Applets are largely considered a failure (even though they were one of the orginal big reasons to use Java). Swing and AWT are too bloated and kludgy, even when compared to the rest of the Java API. Java found it's niche on the server side--exactly opposite from where Sun orginally wanted it in the 1.0 release. Oh, and cell phones, which are actually the sort of devices that Java was orginally targeted at back when it was called 'Oak'.

    ----
    : () { :|:& };:

    Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated

[reply]
[d/l]
Re: Re: HTML as a GUI: part 32,523rd
by nimdokk (Vicar) on Apr 09, 2004 at 12:18 UTC
    I'm not really into Java at all, just sort of speaking off the cuff, but aren't there some compatibility issues between Java implementations? Mainly Microsoft's Java and Sun's Java. This may not be any sort of issue with what you are describing, but I have seen something of the sort cause problems in the past. Mainly, a Java app (using Sun's Java) not playing nice with MS's Java when we attempted to run the app on a server (so it wouldn't be tied to a workstation). Ended up we had to run it off a workstation where Sun's Java could be loaded. Just sort of tossing out my 2¢. :-)

    "Ex Libris un Peut de Tout"
[reply]
      My coworkers ran into the same thing, but between 1.2 and 1.4. I wouldn't trust Java impementations farther than I can throw them.

      ------
      We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

      Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose

[reply]
        I've never trusted Java and I've been using things written in it (never programmed it) since it first came out (at least on the web, since about '95 or '96). I think in theory its a good idea, but it still has a long way to go before it will really be a practical solution, IMO :-)

        "Ex Libris un Peut de Tout"
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom