I don't have a strong opinion on this addition. On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 2:47 PM Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> wrote:
> I don't have an objection to adding this one additional convenience > method if it is generally useful. If there aren't a lot of applications > that would use it, it seems better to go with just the two identified so > far and consider this one later. > > So: would this be a generally useful addition? > > -- Kevin > > > On 9/21/2021 2:43 AM, Marius Hanl wrote: > > As also written in a comment > > here: https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/610 > > I would like to propose one more convenience method which should be > > added to JavaFX: > > > > public static Border stroke(Paint stroke, double width) { > > return new Border(new BorderStroke(stroke, BorderStrokeStyle.SOLID, > null, ne > > w BorderWidths(width))); > > } > > > > I think it's quite common that you want to create a solid border with > > another width then the default of 1 (for every side). > > > > Note: This is also the last use case I think makes sense to add as a > > convenience method. > > Any other use case is likely to be so complex that it makes sense to > > use the normal existing constructors. > > > > Feel free to share you opinion. > > > > - Marius > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 08. Juni 2021 um 03:19 Uhr > > Von: "Nir Lisker" <nlis...@gmail.com> > > An: "Kevin Rushforth" <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> > > Cc: "openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net Mailing" > > <openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net> > > Betreff: Re: [External] : Re: Convenience factories for Border and > > Background > > The new API: > > 1. `Border.of(Paint stroke)` or `Border.stroke(Paint stroke)` that > does > > `new Border(new BorderStroke(Paint stroke , BorderStrokeStyle.SOLID, > > null, > > null));` > > 2. `Background.of((Paint fill)` or `Background.fill(Paint fill)` that > > does > > `new Background(new BackgroundFill(Paint fill, null, null));` > > I don't mind either name choice. > > On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 2:50 AM Kevin Rushforth > > <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> > > wrote: > > > If I recall, there were a few developers that chimed in. It's a > > simple > > > enough addition -- at least your original proposal (not the > > suggestion of > > > mirroring the Color API, which I don't like) -- that it seems OK to > > me. > > > > > > Can you repost your currently proposed API and see if those who > might > > like > > > to use it are satisfied with it? > > > > > > -- Kevin > > > > > > > > > On 6/7/2021 4:41 PM, Nir Lisker wrote: > > > > > > Does this constitute sufficient interest in the enhancement? > > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 6:41 PM Michael Strau� > > <michaelstr...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Another option could be to mirror the `Color` API in both `Border` > > and > > >> `Background`, like in the following examples: > > >> > > >> Color.rgb(125, 100, 75) > > >> Border.rgb(125, 100, 75) > > >> Background.rgb(125, 100, 75) > > >> > > >> Color.gray(127) > > >> Border.gray(127) > > >> Background.gray(127) > > >> > > >> Color.web("orange", 0.5) > > >> Border.web("orange", 0.5) > > >> Background.web("orange", 0.5) > > >> > > >> We could also mirror the named color constants, which would > enable a > > >> very compact syntax: > > >> > > >> StackPane pane = new StackPane(); > > >> pane.setBorder(Border.RED); > > >> pane.setBackground(Background.BLUE); > > >> > > >> This is very similar to how "red" or "blue" are valid values for > > >> "-fx-border" or "-fx-background" in CSS. > > >> > > > > > > > >
