IDEA 4.0???

"IDEA 4.0 Comming soon" is getting kinda stupid. It's been there for months.

WHEN will 4.0 get released? We bought 3.0 in the belief that 4.0 would come soon with GUI support.

No such luck :(

0
85 comments

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:38:15 +0000, Nathan Brown wrote:

Now if IDEA doesn't support this
layout in the UI editor (I don't know as I don't need to use it), that's
something you can criticise, instead of it's lack of support for bad,
bad practices.


My understanding is that JetBrains decided to develop a layout manager
that was targetting GUI designer tools, rather than shoehorning a GUI
design tool to work with highly complex layout managers.

And if you're saying Spring Layout is "tidy and clean", the last time I
looked it wasn't that clean. It's wasn't hard once I got my head around
it, but it was getting rather verbose to do anything.

0

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:27:05 +0000, no_mail wrote:

So they should wait 'till they got it right. At this point, they have
locked users into a useless "forms" file format which doesn't allow me to
distribute source code to open source projects.


There is a code gen option. Yes, it currently generates ugly code, or to
be specific, ugly variable names for unbound objects.

Theres also a third-party code-gen plugin as well.

Well, I have a feature REMOVAL request... I like IntelliJ 3.0, but I don't
think 4.0 is ever going to get installed at my shop. Why bloat it with
such a badly designed feature?


Hell, the other guy at works saying "i'll be upgrading even if only for
the new CVS stuff". The work done in that area is just darn nice.

0

no_mail@jetbrains.com wrote:


Well, I have a feature REMOVAL request... I like IntelliJ 3.0, but I don't think 4.0 is ever going to get installed at my shop. Why bloat it with such a badly designed feature?


Well, I never use the UI Designer, but 4.0 does have some useful features. Support for Generics might be
important for some people. There are also various UI changes that you might find nice. At any rate, I would like
it if the UI designer were a plugin, so you would not need to install the "bloat" if you did not need it.

--

Erb

==============================================================
"Most of you are familiar with the virtues of a programmer.
There are three, of course: laziness, impatience, and hubris."
- Larry Wall
==============================================================

0

Ever heard of anchoring?


And what has anchoring to do with xy layout?

FWIW, my custom layout manager has the anchoring concept (by another
name). On the other hand, it doesn't know about absolute positions -
and I haven't missed them yet.

0

An alien XML format


What's an alien xml format?

0


For me, it's not a matter of liking it or not. It's a matter of
compliance, beeing able to exchange code with other people on other
IDE's, beeing able to swap IDE in the future.


Last I looked all major ide's did read xml files.

This thing is either a vendor lock-in strategy or an engineering
mistake.


You have the source code, even if it's ugly. It shouldn't be too much
work altering the source code generator so that it produces less ugly
code. No lock in that I see.


Also, does anyone have experience in having eclipse/netbeans/jbuilder
read ui code produced from each other?

0

In article <bv64gm$j3g$2@is.intellij.net>,
Thomas Singer <nomail@nodomain.com> wrote:

Seriously, YOU also had no arguments why XY positioning ("layout" would
be too much) is better than layout managing. And, you would be the first
person who believes that fixed positions are good.


On a practical note - the controls in the Aqua look and feel, the
default on MacOS X, are substantially larger than those created in
Metal. If you hard code positions without testing it on other
platforms, it will likely have a layout that looks like utter junk when
brought up on MacOS X. Alternatively, you can fire up Metal and have it
look very strange, and often like junk.

(This used to be a problem with users who had Large Fonts enabled on
Windows as well, but I have not looked into it since I downed my PC
three years ago. I would hope Sun had fixed it, but I am not sure how
they would without layout managers.)

Personally, I do wish that JetBrains had made the gui builder generate
the UI dynamically from xml at client run time. It just does not take
THAT long to parse an xml file if designed well, and it is much more
flexible.

Scott
scott@alodar.com
Java, Cocoa, WebObjects and Database consulting

0

Personally, I do wish that JetBrains had made the gui builder generate
the UI dynamically from xml at client run time.


I tend to agree under one condition: there must be a tool, that checks
at compile time whether there are no errors (e.g. not existing
components referenced in xml file). But there still remains the problem
of obfuscation. How the xml file can determine what component to put at
what position. This never must be done on variable names, because they
change when obfuscating (which is a must for desktop applications).

Tom

0

register with Intelij on their website, and you'll have acees to the Early
Access Program. Here you can download the latest Release Candidate - newer
versions get uploaded very frequently. Thje latest download - build 1122 -
is very close to being complete. GUI builder included



"tim" <tim242@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:30919551.1075110685361.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

"IDEA 4.0 Comming soon" is getting kinda stupid. It's been there for

months.
>

WHEN will 4.0 get released? We bought 3.0 in the belief that 4.0 would

come soon with GUI support.
>

No such luck :(



0

I've been designing GUI's for much more than 5 years and I too find the anchoring approach in .NET to be superior. This is, as he says, actually XY layout, but XY are relative to it's anchor.

XYLayout or not, IDEA 4.0 UI Designer is a big disappointment to me too. Quite unproductive.

0

Anchoring is xy layout, but xy is relative to it's anchor.

Superior design method utilized by professional layout tools in the marketing/design industry for decades.

0

Not standardized, like SOAP, XAML, XMI, etc.

For Windows development XAML will be the standard layout XML, but there is no such standard for Java yet. Nor will there be in the forseeable future (at least there's no JSR on it)

0

>>I'm sorry, did you know something about my past that I don't?


Well, the fact that you suggest using SpringLayout tells me you are not very experiences...

0

I'm ALL for XAML, but it's tied to .NET so it doesn't help me.

0

At any rate, I would like it if the UI designer were a
plugin, so you would not need to install the "bloat" if
you did not need it.


Agreed Erb, it would make more sense to me to have the UI Designer install as an optional plugin too. As it's something I'm probably never going to need I'd rather it didn't bog down the IDE so to speak.

0

I know fixed position is good if anchoring is used. So does all the other pro's.

0

I know that at least eclipse, visual age and jbuilder works well this way.

0

Carlos,

Anchoring is a technique for allowing the more productive "drag'n'drop" XY layout approach, while retaining the relative position when the font is changed or the windows changes size.

It's kindof XYLayout done right. In my experience, it blows the hell out of any other type of layout manager.

I think there is a lot of confusion about absolute position here... The point is this: anchoring and XYLayout allows you to put controls and widgets wherever you want them to be. But you can also anchor to another control or the parent windows. So it's XY, but XY is relative. In practice, it works out great.

0

Timberlake wrote:

I know that at least eclipse, visual age and jbuilder works well this
way.


I didn't mean work well in isolation, I meant can thyy read
interoperate.

Can you create a form in JBuilder gui designer, go to Netbeans and use
it's gui designer to make changes to the form. And with Eclipse.

Just curious.

0

no_mail@jetbrains.com wrote:

I know fixed position is good if anchoring is used. So does all the
other pro's.


Yes, yes some pros.

Management/Gui consultants decides on a new look for the app:

Distance to borders: 8 points instead of 5 points.
Minimum horizontal distance between components: 10pt instead of 8
points.
Vertical distance between components: 8pt instead of 5pt.

My way:

1) Change defaults for app.

Edit MyLayoutManager.java:

layoutManager.setInsets(8) // instead of 5
layoutManager.setHorizontalInterval(10) // instead of 8
layoutManager.setVerticalInterval(8) // instead of 5

Compile one class. Redeploy.


2) Even better:

Edit application.properties:

Insets = 8
HorizontalInterval = 10
VerticalInterval = 8

Everything is done.




Your way:

Edit every gui definition file, change all the xy positions. Recompile.
Correct all errors. Return to step 2.



In my case (not a big app), I would need to do this for 500+ gui files.

I'll contact you to do it, as you think that's the way things should be
done :)


0

I would say that any true gui developer would not use a gui designer. It's just the VB throw backs that always want it.

0

Last time I used jbuilder you could not. It required jbuilder specific layout managers

0

I've been designing GUI's for much more than 5 years and I too find
the anchoring approach in .NET to be superior. This is, as he says,
actually XY layout, but XY are relative to it's anchor.



No XY positions ever.

If the standard font size changes so that component size changes, the
displacements relative to the anchor should also change.


Some possible abilities of a relative layout manager with anchors:

default insets to border, default horizontal/vertical space between
components, standard indentation space from anchors, ...


anchor horizontally/vertically relative to , with alignment
(double)

relative horizontal/vertical indentation from anchor (double) ->
result: horizontal/vertical displacement between this component and the
anchor will be value * standard[H/V]Indentation.

horizontal/vertical space to anchor (double) -> result:
horizontal/vertical space between this component and the anchor will be
value * standard[H/V]Space.


etc, etc.

No fixed coordinates/displacements anywhere.




With an xy layout, to mantain the aspect of the gui due to the
increase/decrease in font size, you should change every xy coordinate
you introduced.


With a good relative layout, when you choose to increase the standard
font size by 10% you also increase the displacement constants by 10%
for the gui aspect stays the same.

One change in one file and everything is done.



Also, you can put the "constants" in a properties file (or wherever app
properties are stored), so that customization can be done without
having to change on line of code.


XYLayout or not, IDEA 4.0 UI Designer is a big disappointment to me
too. Quite unproductive.



I don't use it, so I wouldn't know :)

I just know that I won't put any any fixed coordinates in a gui
definition file.

0

If you want better looking GUI source code, use the GuiSource plugin.

0

If you use standard Swing code, no problems. If you use a specific layout manager, it usually a simple as distributing the layout manager jar.

No so in IDEA :(

0

I don't think you can. There is no standard on how a GUI form and the generated code are to be connected.

At least Netbeans GUI designer could never import another GUI builders code (unless they write specific conversion tools).

0

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:14:43 +0000, no_mail wrote:

For Windows development XAML will be the standard layout XML, but there is
no such standard for Java yet. Nor will there be in the forseeable future
(at least there's no JSR on it)


Just cause theres no JSR doesn't means theres no standard, or can't be.

I would like to think, and probably see XUL become "the standard".

0

In article <14034423.1075285056388.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net>,
Rob Bradley <no_mail@jetbrains.com> wrote:

At any rate, I would like it if the UI designer were a
plugin, so you would not need to install the "bloat" if
you did not need it.


Agreed Erb, it would make more sense to me to have the UI Designer install as
an optional plugin too. As it's something I'm probably never going to need
I'd rather it didn't bog down the IDE so to speak.


What makes you think the UI designer bogs down the IDE?

0

In article <7440358.1075310442108.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net>,
charles decroes <spam@decroes.com> wrote:

I would say that any true gui developer would not use a gui designer. It's
just the VB throw backs that always want it.


Just about ever Macintosh program written in the past 20 years has been
written with the aid of a GUI designer. I think there are plenty of
"true GUI developers" in the Mac world. (From what I've seen, the best
GUI developers work in the Mac world.)

0

best gui developers or best gui designers?

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.