Yes, you can just use "new Stage()" to create a stage for such an
application to use. As for registering it as primary, we hadn't thought
to provide such an API. I don't think it is needed, since the ability to
embed the primary stage in an applet in a browser (which is not possible
unless you run it as an Application via the plugin), is really the only
thing that distinguishes a primary stage from any other Stage.
As for launching multiple Applications, you still won't be able to do
that by actually calling Application.launch more than once, but if you
"roll your own" launcher you can accomplish the same thing. You can
construct multiple Application objects, calling the init() and start()
method of each.
One thing to be aware of is that just like the JFXPanel case, you will
probably want to call Platform.setImplicitExit(false) in this case.
Otherwise, when the last Stage is closed, the JavaFX runtime will exit.
-- Kevin
Benjamin Gudehus wrote:
Wow, this patch will simplify the architecture of JavaFX testing
libraries/frameworks.
From my perspective it is important to have a method to start the FX
runtime and thread.
I guess one would just use `new Stage()` to create the primary Stage? Or do
we need to register the primary Stage somewhere?
This is a great.
As a sidenote: Another use-case for testing is to be able to call the
Application launch procedure multiple times (probably for different
Application classes) without starting the FX runtime. TestFX currently uses
custom code similar to the code in `LauncherImpl` to archive this.
--Benjamin
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Ali Ebrahimi <ali.ebrahimi1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi,
I know concerns here, but I think PlatformImpl.startup() and
Platform.startup() should have same behavior from caller's POW.
So I think if we can not have default behavior(duplicate calls) for public
API so please change method name.
My suggestions: Platform.safeStartup() or Platform.startPlatform or
Platform.start
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM, Jonathan Giles <
jonathan.gi...@oracle.com>
wrote:
I don't believe there is any inconsistency here. We are preserving the
existing semantics in PlatformImpl.startup to not prevent duplicate calls
by default, whilst we are reversing the semantics for the public API in
Platform, where we do prevent duplicate calls. The end result is that we
have one public API (Platform.startup) with one set of semantics (prevent
duplicate values).
-- Jonathan
On 21/11/15 11:57 PM, Ali Ebrahimi wrote:
Hi,
I think there is an inconsistency between :
PlatformImpl.java
public static void startup(final Runnable r) {
+ startup(r, false); //************* here default value false
+ }
and
Platform.java
+ public static void startup(Runnable runnable) {
+ PlatformImpl.startup(runnable, true); //******** here default
value true
+ }
On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 3:28 AM, Kevin Rushforth <
<kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> wrote:
Jonathan and all,
Please review the following new API proposal to add the ability to
explicitly start the FX runtime.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8090585
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8090585/webrev.00/
-- Kevin
--
Best Regards,
Ali Ebrahimi
--
Best Regards,
Ali Ebrahimi
