On 3/9/24 10:30 AM, Marius Hanl wrote:
However, I found this old email thread. Two answers which reflect what
we said:
https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2013-September/010067.html
https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2013-September/010094.html
Wow, good find! Thank you, Marius. I am pleasantly surprised to see some
of the same people in that old discussion now participating in this one.
In reading the thread, it seems the decision to keep the JavaFX API so
closed was made primarily by Richard Bair based on his own experience,
and is perhaps best explained in Item 19 of /Effective Java, Third
Edition./ by Joshua Bloch. Summary: inheritance violates encapsulation,
so designing a class for inheritance "is not a decision to be undertaken
lightly."
I don't have the experience to offer my own opinion, but with all the
talk of opening things up, I thought it might be a good time to revisit
the history. You know, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned
to repeat it," and all that. 🙂
John
