Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

I had a quick look at Java 8 streams and I'm afraid they are of no use for reactive programming. The fundamental problem is that in java.util.stream, computation is driven by the stream consumer, rather than the stream source, which is a complete opposite of "reactive". On the other hand, JavaFX O

hg: openjfx/8u-dev/rt: Ensemble8: Fix for RT-31716 java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException in Modena

Changeset: f339e7628486 Author:Alexander Kouznetsov Date: 2013-12-16 16:54 -0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/8u-dev/rt/rev/f339e7628486 Ensemble8: Fix for RT-31716 java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException in Modena ! apps/experiments/Modena/src/main/java/modena/Modena.java !

hg: openjfx/8u-dev/rt: Ensemble8: Fix for RT-34953 [Ensemble] Brick Breaker game is unplayable using the keyboard

Changeset: 19ee893eda91 Author:Alexander Kouznetsov Date: 2013-12-16 16:33 -0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/8u-dev/rt/rev/19ee893eda91 Ensemble8: Fix for RT-34953 [Ensemble] Brick Breaker game is unplayable using the keyboard ! apps/samples/Ensemble8/src/samples/java

Re: (In)Sanity Testing Mondays

Hi all, So we tested and found problems. Let's talk about our findings tomorrow and summarize the results to the list. It's likely faster than back and forth email or posts. I didn't see anyone (in)sane enough in the community taking part. If you tested, you get an opinion on the process.

Re: [ListView] `b.bind(a)` not behaviorally equivalent to `a.addListener(o -> b.set(a.get()))`

Never mind, b.bind(a); should not be equivalent to a.addListener(o -> b.set(a.get())); in the first place, but rather to a.addListener(o -> b.set(a.get())); b.set(a.get()); // don't forget this! When I fixed my example, I'm not observing any difference in behavior. I'm still n

Re: accessibility

Hi Michael, Accessibility has been on and off the radar for OpenJFX for quite a while now. Some preliminary work was done, but a final implementation and API was never reached. Further, the people who were working on it either left the company or left to work some place else. The thing that

Re: [ListView] `b.bind(a)` not behaviorally equivalent to `a.addListener(o -> b.set(a.get()))`

Filing a bug never hurts. We'll either fix it, or close it and explain why it's not a bug then. -- best regards, Anthony On 12/13/2013 11:17 PM, Tomas Mikula wrote: I guess my main question is: should I file a bug on ListView? Tomas On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Tomas Mikula wrote: I ju

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

I agree, that's more of what I was thinking. On Dec 16, 2013, at 10:31 AM, John Smith wrote: > Perhaps reactive programming is different from the problem Tomas is solving, > but I think a research project which combined some of the principles of > functional reactive programming > (http://la

RE: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

Perhaps reactive programming is different from the problem Tomas is solving, but I think a research project which combined some of the principles of functional reactive programming (http://lampwww.epfl.ch/~imaier/pub/DeprecatingObserversTR2010.pdf) with JavaFX properties using Java 8 lambdas an

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

As a matter of fact, I have. Only to the extent of the "Principles of Reactive Programming" [1] course that is currently in progress on Coursera. From what I have seen so far, it's all about asynchronous composition (with emphasis on both "asynchronous" and "composition"). I didn't see it addressin

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

Have you looked at https://github.com/Netflix/RxJava by chance? I've been dying to see somebody do an RxJava in JavaFX ever since devoxx and it looks like you may have inadvertently started down that path :-). Richard On Dec 16, 2013, at 8:09 AM, Tomas Mikula wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at

Re: discussion about touch events

Pavel, See RT-34945 for a good example to the case that touch and mouse event should behave differently on controls. Assaf On 12/15/2013 05:43 PM, Assaf Yavnai wrote: Pavel, I will summarize my answers here, and not inline, I hope I will touch

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Tomas Mikula wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Scott Palmer wrote: >> Interesting, no worse than John's pattern though. >> I thought of using a try/finally to make sure release was called and that >> naturally lead to thinking of try-with-resources, where

Re: Option to keep Stages always on top on JavaFX 8 ?

Look how low the bug number is ... we must fix this. Steve On 2013-12-16 8:54 AM, Anthony Petrov wrote: Hi Peter, You might want to watch this bug: https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-153 -- best regards, Anthony On 12/16/2013 12:22 PM, Peter Penzov wrote: Hi All, I'm also interest

Progress Bar into Combo Box is not working properly

Hi All, I want to implement Progress Bar into Combo Box. I pasted the code here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20518329/combobox-with-progress-bars-is-not-working-properly When I run the code the progress bar is empty. There is no selected Progress Bar which is displayed by default. And

Re: Option to keep Stages always on top on JavaFX 8 ?

Hi Peter, You might want to watch this bug: https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-153 -- best regards, Anthony On 12/16/2013 12:22 PM, Peter Penzov wrote: Hi All, I'm also interested in this. Can you share some information? Regards, Peter On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Herve Girod

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

Point made. Tom On 2013-12-16 12:17, Tomas Mikula wrote: On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Tom Eugelink wrote: I understand what you are trying to do. I was wondering if a more coarse grained approach would be preferable, so a central registration of whether or not to postpone change events.

Re: Javafxpackager build error on Win7 64

Artem, That was exactly the case, as we discussed off-list. I've asked Francisco to follow up on the list about that and file a JIRA. The problem seems to be that the build system doesn't pick up WinSDK 7.1 installed with the VS2010 Express. Thanks, Vadim On 16.12.2013 13:06, Artem Ananiev wr

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Tomas Mikula wrote: > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Tom Eugelink wrote: >> >> I understand what you are trying to do. I was wondering if a more coarse >> grained approach would be preferable, so a central registration of whether >> or not to postpone change ev

Re: [announce] InhiBeans: mitigate redundant recalculations

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Tom Eugelink wrote: > > I understand what you are trying to do. I was wondering if a more coarse > grained approach would be preferable, so a central registration of whether > or not to postpone change events. > > So: > Central.postponeAllChangeEvents() > Central.r

Re: Javafxpackager build error on Win7 64

Francisco, it can also be caused by using Windows SDK 7.0A, which is bundled with Visual Studio 2010 Express. It can't be used to build 64-bit FX, you need either VS 2010 Pro, or Windows SDK 7.1 (downloaded as a separate bundle from MS site). Thanks, Artem On 12/14/2013 2:07 PM, Vadim Pakh

Re: Option to keep Stages always on top on JavaFX 8 ?

Hi All, I'm also interested in this. Can you share some information? Regards, Peter On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Herve Girod wrote: > I know that this option is not available for JavaFX 2.2, but is it planned > for Java 8, and for what time frame if the answer is yes (for example, for