<@U011CJ3S9MY>: JavaFX. Depending on your needs, J...

# tornadofx

[melatonina]

@Samkeene: JavaFX. Depending on your needs, JavaFX may be, all things considered, just as good as TornadoFX: you may miss a few things, but you would also not deal with a major component that is not actively developed and whose design is flawed and dated in many regards. Software ecosystems are in constant evolution, and not being developed and updated is a huge problem. I started FX development with TornadoFX, and I had to learn how JavaFX does things and then also how TornadoFX does the same thing, just for saving a few keystrokes here and there. Probably it's the kind of software I'm writing. I don't care about most of the extra features of TornadoFX, because they are obsoleted or geared towards line-of-business applications. So-called "creative" applications often are not well served by "standard" toolkits, to be honest. For example, "editing information" in my application is kinf of particular and looks very different from the "editing model" of TornadoFX (why the author used the name ViewModel for what is an "edit model" is beyond my comprehension). I'm also writing an application which is the desktop version of a mobile-first application, so I'm influenced by that for many reasons and less likely to adhere to the assumptions at the base of TornadoFX. My point is that, being TornadoFX not developed anymore and with no signs of any kind of plans for the complete redesign that it needs in order to fit its possible niche, in 2020, learning TornadoFX may be not worth the effort. Cognitive effort is a price. Stockholm syndrome may happen when you spend very much effort learning a piece of software.

[altavir]

Tornado IS javafx

[melatonina]

TornadoFX is a few different things. One of them is "a thin API layer over JavaFX".
If TornadoFX were JavaFX it would not have another name and a github repository and its own documentation and a Slack channel.