On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 03:08:59 GMT, Nir Lisker wrote:
>> Both seem fine, I don't have any preference over one or the other.
>
> I struggled with finding a good description here
> [previously](https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/675#discussion_r777801130).
> I think that mstr2 gave a good approach
On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:01:01 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> I read this comment after what I wrote about `flatMap`, so mstr2 also had
>> the idea of "More precisely", which is good :)
>>
>> I would suggested something similar to what I did there:
>>
>>
>> Creates a new {@code ObservableValue} t
On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 03:28:01 GMT, Nir Lisker wrote:
>> Yeah, agreed, it is a bit annoying to have to deal with the fact that these
>> classes are wrappers around an actual value and having to refer to them as
>> such to be "precise". I'm willing to make another pass at all of these to
>> chan
On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 03:28:01 GMT, Nir Lisker wrote:
>> Yeah, agreed, it is a bit annoying to have to deal with the fact that these
>> classes are wrappers around an actual value and having to refer to them as
>> such to be "precise". I'm willing to make another pass at all of these to
>> chan
On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:55:30 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> modules/javafx.base/src/main/java/javafx/beans/value/ObservableValue.java
>> line 146:
>>
>>> 144: * Creates an {@code ObservableValue} that holds the result of
>>> applying a
>>> 145: * mapping on this {@code ObservableValue}
On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 23:55:36 GMT, Michael Strauß wrote:
>> I've changed this to use your wording as I think it does read much better.
>>
>> Perhaps also possible:
>>
>> Creates a new {@code ObservableValue} that holds the value of a nested
>> {@code ObservableValue} supplied
>> by
On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 10:17:01 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> modules/javafx.base/src/main/java/javafx/beans/value/ObservableValue.java
>> line 197:
>>
>>> 195: /**
>>> 196: * Creates an {@code ObservableValue} that holds the value of an
>>> {@code ObservableValue}
>>> 197: * resulti
On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:32:18 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> modules/javafx.base/src/main/java/javafx/beans/value/FlatMappedBinding.java
>> line 68:
>>
>>> 66: };
>>> 67: }
>>> 68: }
>>
>> Several files are missing newlines after the last closing brace. Do we
>> enforce this?
>>
>>
On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 09:48:39 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> modules/javafx.base/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/binding/Subscription.java
>> line 67:
>>
>>> 65: */
>>> 66: default Subscription and(Subscription other) {
>>> 67: Objects.requireNonNull(other);
>>
>> This exception cou
On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 20:09:23 GMT, Michael Strauß wrote:
>> John Hendrikx has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Process review comments (2)
>
> modules/javafx.base/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/binding/Subscription.java
> line 4
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:49:38 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This w
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:49:38 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This w
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:49:38 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This w
> This is an implementation of the proposal in
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
> good test coverage.
>
> This was based on https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/434 but with a
14 matches
Mail list logo
