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

List:       openjdk-openjfx-dev
Subject:    Re: Improve property system to facilitate correct usage
From:       Michael_Strauß <michaelstrau2 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2021-07-28 1:09:20
Message-ID: CAJEpuXTy3M_DrFPsdoeb3y+kseNfs8js=sByMLyOy7UY_Mpy8A () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

I should point out that the rest of the JavaFX framework did not
require a single code change as a result of the API changes. So while
some changes are binary incompatible, they are syntactically
transparent.

Am Mi., 28. Juli 2021 um 01:39 Uhr schrieb Kevin Rushforth
<kevin.rushforth@oracle.com>:
>
> This will take a while to work through, and we will need to get general
> consensus on the API changes.
>
> I doubt I can support incompatible breaking changes in this area, given
> how fundamental property and bindings are to JavaFX. I'll take a look,
> but it is likely that the incompatible API changes part of your proposed
> change will not be accepted.
>
> The changes enforcing correct usage should be a lot less controversial
> and easier to get through.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 7/27/2021 4:23 PM, Michael Strau=C3=9F wrote:
> > I propose a set of changes to the JavaFX property system that I've
> > outlined in this PR: https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/590
> >
> > The changes fall into two categories: enforcement of correct usage
> > (there are several cases listed in the PR), and deprecating untyped
> > APIs (for removal in a future version) so as to make the intent of the
> > API more clear to developers.
> >
> > Even though there are breaking changes, the impact on application code
> > should be minimal. I'd welcome any comments on this proposal.
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]