Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Research about SWING/AWT/Processing replacement #5

Open
ghjansen opened this issue Feb 19, 2017 · 0 comments
Open

Research about SWING/AWT/Processing replacement #5

ghjansen opened this issue Feb 19, 2017 · 0 comments

Comments

@ghjansen
Copy link
Owner

ghjansen commented Feb 19, 2017

CAS is currently mixing SWING/AWT with 2 Processing applets, which doesn't seems really good.

SWING/AWT was used to avoid the time required to draw GUI control components using Processing, but the idea of having the entire GUI using Processing only is great! There are Processing GUI libraries out there like ControlP5 that require some investigation to conclude if their components support all CAS needs (window resizing, fullscreen, scrolls, buttons, fields, etc..).

The use of 2 Processing applets (one for the rule configuration and the other for the simulation view) seems to cause an excessive resource consumption that could be avoided by using a single Processing instance (with or without SWING/AWT). Also, it is important to use latest Processing. If the entire GUI could not be migrated to a single Processing instance somehow, then different technologies should be considered.

If no technology could be found to handle the job, maybe it should be considered to keep using SWING/AWT but along with JOGL.

@ghjansen ghjansen changed the title Research on SWING/AWT/Processing substitution Research about SWING/AWT/Processing replacement Feb 19, 2017
@ghjansen ghjansen added this to Backlog in Interface lift Feb 19, 2017
This was referenced Feb 19, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Interface lift
  
Backlog
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant