Originally posted by JAY asasd:
I havent been able to figure out what makes JFACE any easier to implement than SWT. It seems like it only saves you a few lines of code here and there. For example, JFace claims to streamline event handling by implementing the Action Class. But how is adding an "action class" any less tedious than adding an "action listener" ?
For 1, and this applies to Swing also, Action classes are reuasable. Instead of writing the actionPerformed (Swing) method for every button give the button an instance of your action class.
The other thing JFace does is it takes care of all the garbage collection for you that you have to do manually in SWT. Remember that in SWT you have to manually dispose of certain components because they are drawn by the OS and the VM's GC has no control over them.
There is a bit of window creation code that is taken care of for you. Complex components like Tables and their models are better in JFace. Just things like that are what I think make JFace easier to use. Although remember also that JFace couldn't exist without SWT. If you look at the JFace classes, they are all SWT internally. So they saved you from having to implement all those JFace classes manually.