[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-openjfx-dev
Subject:    Re: TableCell.getTableRow() return value
From:       Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth () oracle ! com>
Date:       2015-11-25 21:37:28
Message-ID: 56562A18.2060002 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Looks good to me. I also added a comment to the bug report.

-- Kevin


Jonathan Giles wrote:
> I have filed and attached the issue here:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144088
>
> @Kevin - would you mind giving this a quick API review please?
>
> -- Jonathan
>
> On 26/11/15 10:00 AM, Jonathan Giles wrote:
>> I found the Jira issue I was looking for....unfortunately it lacks a 
>> lot of detail. I have just updated it to give the example of why it 
>> had to be backed out.
>>
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8102370
>>
>> Fortunately the issue was in another location, and I don't think we 
>> will have the same issue in this proposed change.
>>
>> -- Jonathan
>>
>> On 26/11/15 6:46 AM, Richard Bair wrote:
>>> You should be able to add generics compatibly, you just can't change 
>>> the generics signature. One shot to get it right IIRC.
>>>
>>>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:57 AM, Jonathan Giles 
>>>> <jonathan.giles@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It was an oversight at the time, and (from memory) is now a 
>>>> breaking change to fix it, so for now it remains as it is, sadly.
>>>>
>>>> -- Jonathan
>>>> Sent from a touch device. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>>
>>>>> On 26 November 2015 03:33:04 GMT+13:00, Lawrence Parker 
>>>>> <larry@answerrocket.com> wrote:
>>>>> Seems like getTableRow() should return TableRow<S> instead of just
>>>>> TableRow.  That way I wouldn't have to cast getItem().
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/javafx/api/javafx/scene/control/TableCell.html 
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/javafx/api/javafx/scene/control/TableCell.html> 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    @Override
>>>>>    public void updateItem(Boolean isEnabled, boolean empty) {
>>>>> ...
>>>>>        TestCase testCase = (TestCase)getTableRow().getItem();
>>>>>
>>>>> This would be nicer:
>>>>>
>>>>>        TestCase testCase = getTableRow().getItem();
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems like an easy change to the getTableRow() method:
>>>>>
>>>>> public class TableCell<S,T> extends IndexedCell<T> {
>>>>> ...
>>>>>    public final TableRow getTableRow() { return tableRow.get(); }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Was this an oversight, or is there a reason that getTableRow() 
>>>>> needs to
>>>>> return TableRow instead of TableRow<S>?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for any help.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Larry
>>
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]