On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 23:27:07 GMT, John Hendrikx <jhendr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I couldn't quite see which you prefer here; you said "This one makes sense" > but not quite sure which version it refers to (I suppose the depth first > version?) I should have said "this one makes sense **too**". The point was that while your fix is good, it's not the only good fix, and I wasn't sold on choosing the one in this PR just yet. If "breadth-first" is easier to do and requires less memory to remember the old values, then I have no problem with "depth-first". I don't have a strict preference for either approach mostly because I don't do nested modifications myself. I'm not at all sure that we need so specify this behavior, but we need to be consistent with it. @arapte Why do you think we should say what order the nested event is dispatched at? I'm also investigating the effect of this patch in conjunction with addition/removal of listeners in conjunction with a nested event. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/837
