Comment on VLAN’s and Subnets For Home Networks

chrash0@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

• HamsterRage@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Composé is great for Android because it’s so integrated with the ecosystem. For desktop applications, JavaFX - especially coupled with Kotlin - is a clear winner to me.

  I should point out that I don’t use FXML or SceneBuilder, but code all of my layouts in Kotlin. Kotlin features like extension functions let you eliminate 90%+ of the JavaFX layout boilerplate.

  Back to Compose. Both Compose and JavaFX are Reactive GUI environments, although many (most???) people don’t realize that about JavaFX. But both environments take opposite approaches to Reactive design.

  Composé, as the name implies, uses what I call “compositional reactivity”. This means that the actual layout in totally static, but is recomposed, in whole or part, in response to the data representation of state. That code will look at the various State elements each time it runs, and alter the layout according to their current values.

  JavaFX uses “Reactive Layouts” (my term, again). JavaFX has a comprehensive, yet extensible, collection of Observable data types and another comprehensive, yet also extensible, collection of Bindings to allow you to connect them together in any way that you can think of.

  Every configurable element of every screen Node in JavaFX is expressed via these Observable values, meaning that they can be bound in some fashion - in either direction - to elements in the State data structure.

  The result is that it JavaFX the layout code is run exactly once. But this layout code not only performs the actual layout, it also creates the bindings to State. After that, the layout behaves dynamically all my itself.

  In JavaFX, layout composition is actually quite expensive in terms of performance, and recomposition is to be avoided if possible - and it is virtually always possible. I have seen people bitch about JavaFX being “heavyweight” and raggy, and I can guarantee you that those people are just doing a lot of recomposition.

  The biggest challenge to programming, and I say this with more years of experience than most people reading this have been alive, is in understanding the underlying paradigm that governs whatever language or toolkit they are using. Unfortunately, you unlikely to open up a book or webpage and see, “The underlying paradigm of this technology is…”.

  That’s especially true of JavaFX. It takes a LOT of time to realize the Reactive nature of JavaFX by yourself. Consequently, I don’t think that JavaFX gets recognized as the desktop application powerhouse that it is. As someone who has mostly mastered it, I’m constantly amazed at how trivial it is to build truely complicated applications with JavaFX.

  source

  • chrash0@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    yeah i get that.

    generally most modern UIs are moving away from those reactive patterns (React, Svelte, etc) just cuz the composition can be optimized (Kotlin compiler plugin, shadow-DOM, etc), and a lot of people—myself included—find that declarative design easier to reason about. and yeah i guess i outed myself as an Android dev, but i can’t in good conscience recommend the node based Android XML UI lol (although that’s a different SDK).

    anyway, not to yuck your yum. i played around with JavaFX back in the day but never made anything to speak of. i’ll have to check out more of your blog!

    source