# javafx

Christian Turner

06/24/2022, 4:42 PM
I'm currently deciding on libraries for an application I am writing in Kotlin. Trying to determine whether it makes more sense to use JavaFX as is or to use the TornadoFx wrapper. My concern with TornadoFX is that it seems like the library isnt being updated as much. I originally intended to use Compose but I don't think its up to par regrading desktop developmemt. Curious on your thoughts.

Katrina Eaton

06/26/2022, 12:21 AM
While the documentation is limited, I found that TornadoFX covers most capabilities of JavaFX, even if I couldn't find documentation about it. The names are basically the same, you can intuitively figure them out most of the time. Also, I found it to be worth using TornadoFX because in a pinch you can write in just straight JavaFX code and it'll run fine. Using TornadoFX is not in lieu of JavaFX, it's on top of JavaFX. You need both in your gradle file, because TornadoFX doesn't work without JavaFX.

Christian Turner

06/26/2022, 2:05 AM
Thank you for the info. Do you know if the newest javafx will work well even if its not fully optimal?


07/01/2022, 8:06 AM
Consider de-risking your packaging and deployment needs by testing these first as well. A strength of Compose for Desktop is how easy JetBrains made it to produce install packages for each platform.
JavaFX was a 'nightmare' to package last time I tried.
...i.e. involving a lot of manual work collecting class paths, using shadow Jar plugins, fighting with Java Jigsaw Modules etc. perhaps I was doing something very wrong, or it has improved in later versions of Java. But just a forewarning to cover that aspect before you've completed your whole App.