Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of
the original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the
removal process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I
decorated the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the
undecorated one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list,
the listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal
to the one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself,
but also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
Error in tablevie ghost error
Why when i clik in the area outside row contain a data and outside column area I get an error? red area of eror
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of
the original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the
removal process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I
decorated the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the
undecorated one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list,
the listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal
to the one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself,
but also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF when building under windows
Hi, I'm currently trying to build OpenJFX from source on Windows - I've followed the instructions on the build page and have Visual Studio 2010, the June 2010 directx sdk, cygwin and its relevant modules installed. However, when building it fails at the buildJavaFXPackage task (output below.) I'm not sure if those warnings are normal or not, but they definitely look suspicious. It seems the actual error that's stopping things is the fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt line, though all I've found searching around for that error is that incremental:off should be set to avoid it, which it already is in the gradle task. Any ideas? Thanks, Michael :fxml:jar :fxml:assemble :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager javafxpackager.cpp C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(258) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(269) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(286) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(426) : warning C4996: 'getenv': This function or variable may be unsafe. Consider using _dupenv_s instead. To disable deprecation,use _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS. See online help for details. C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/INCLUDE\stdlib.h(433) : see declaration of 'getenv'LINK : fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager FAILED FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. * Where: Build file 'C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\build.gradle' line: 1817 * What went wrong: Execution failed for task ':fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager'. Process 'command 'C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/BIN/link.exe'' finished with non-zero exit value 1123
Re: *PropertyBase vs Simple*Property
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Tom Schindl
tom.schi...@bestsolution.at wrote:
Hi Richard,
Coming back to this old thread and now that we are using lamdas all over
I guess we could take one more look into that.
I've prototyped an initial version by introducing a new internal type
named InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty (not the best name ever!) - see
code pasted below.
And now one can write code like this:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(this,
viewport, (o) - {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
} );
}
return viewport;
}
instead of
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new ObjectPropertyBaseRectangle2D() {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
@Override
public Object getBean() {
return ImageView.this;
}
@Override
public String getName() {
return viewport;
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Nice idea. Just to get the comparison to status quo more fair, you
don't need to override getBean() and getName() methods:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new SimpleObjectPropertyRectangle2D(this, viewport) {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Regards,
Tomas
Which allows us to get rid of most of the ObjectPropertyBase sublcasses.
Tom
package com.sun.javafx.property;
import java.util.function.Consumer;
import javafx.beans.property.SimpleObjectProperty;
public final class InvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT extends
SimpleObjectPropertyT {
private final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer;
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(T initialValue, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean, name);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, T
initialValue, final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean,name,initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidationConsumer.accept(this);
}
}
On 22.01.13 10:30, Richard Bair wrote:
Is the Java8 plan still there if not should the current Simple*Property
subclasses who overload invalidated be changed to PropertyBase?
It
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I consult
a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can perfectly
live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same
HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of
the original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the
removal process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that
I decorated the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist
the undecorated one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list,
the listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is
equal to the one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself,
but also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
If you are talking about a change to the JavaFX API, we are not likely
to accept such a change if it breaks the contract of equals() or
hashcode(). In your own app it may not matter, but it is dangerous to
assume it won't matter to anyone. Martin owns the core libraries and can
comment further.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I consult
a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can perfectly
live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of the
original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the removal
process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I decorated
the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the undecorated
one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list, the
listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal to the
one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself, but
also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
The only thing which I ask for is to flip this „if in the *ExpressionHelper
classes:
So, JavaFX does not break anything and it is up to the app developer to take
the risk or not.
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener))
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:42 schrieb Kevin Rushforth
kevin.rushfo...@oracle.commailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com:
If you are talking about a change to the JavaFX API, we are not likely to
accept such a change if it breaks the contract of equals() or hashcode(). In
your own app it may not matter, but it is dangerous to assume it won't matter
to anyone. Martin owns the core libraries and can comment further.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I consult
a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can perfectly
live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same
HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits
ma...@datenwort.atmailto:ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of the
original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the removal
process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I decorated
the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the undecorated
one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list, the
listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal to the
one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself, but
also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
Re: LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF when building under windows
Do you have VS 2010 Service Pack 1? I've seen this failure on machines that don't have SP1 installed. -- Kevin Michael Berry wrote: Hi, I'm currently trying to build OpenJFX from source on Windows - I've followed the instructions on the build page and have Visual Studio 2010, the June 2010 directx sdk, cygwin and its relevant modules installed. However, when building it fails at the buildJavaFXPackage task (output below.) I'm not sure if those warnings are normal or not, but they definitely look suspicious. It seems the actual error that's stopping things is the fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt line, though all I've found searching around for that error is that incremental:off should be set to avoid it, which it already is in the gradle task. Any ideas? Thanks, Michael :fxml:jar :fxml:assemble :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager javafxpackager.cpp C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(258) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(269) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(286) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(426) : warning C4996: 'getenv': This function or variable may be unsafe. Consider using _dupenv_s instead. To disable deprecation,use _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS. See online help for details. C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/INCLUDE\stdlib.h(433) : see declaration of 'getenv'LINK : fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager FAILED FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. * Where: Build file 'C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\build.gradle' line: 1817 * What went wrong: Execution failed for task ':fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager'. Process 'command 'C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/BIN/link.exe'' finished with non-zero exit value 1123
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
Yep, null throws a NullPointerException in addListener by design (also in
removeListener) - the listener collection is safe.
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:50 schrieb Kevin Rushforth
kevin.rushfo...@oracle.commailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com:
What if changeListeners[index] is null? Maybe this is already illegal
Anyway, let's see what Martin has to say. In the mean time you file a JIRA
enhancement request (issuetype=Tweak) if you like.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
The only thing which I ask for is to flip this „if in the *ExpressionHelper
classes:
So, JavaFX does not break anything and it is up to the app developer to take
the risk or not.
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener))
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:42 schrieb Kevin Rushforth
kevin.rushfo...@oracle.commailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com:
If you are talking about a change to the JavaFX API, we are not likely to
accept such a change if it breaks the contract of equals() or hashcode(). In
your own app it may not matter, but it is dangerous to assume it won't matter
to anyone. Martin owns the core libraries and can comment further.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I consult
a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can perfectly
live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same
HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits
ma...@datenwort.atmailto:ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of the
original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the removal
process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I decorated
the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the undecorated
one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list, the
listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal to the
one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself, but
also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
Hi Mario,
even if your proposal gets accepted, you would still depend on an
implementation detail of JavaFX, which is always good to avoid.
To sum up, my second proposal compared to your current solution:
(+) your equals() stays symmetric;
(+) no need for an extra Map of listeners.
My second proposal compared to your desired solution if your proposal
is accepted:
(+) your equals() stays symmetric;
(+) you don't depend on an implementation detail in JavaFX.
Best,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
The only thing which I ask for is to flip this „if in the *ExpressionHelper
classes:
So, JavaFX does not break anything and it is up to the app developer to take
the risk or not.
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener))
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:42 schrieb Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com:
If you are talking about a change to the JavaFX API, we are not likely to
accept such a change if it breaks the contract of equals() or hashcode(). In
your own app it may not matter, but it is dangerous to assume it won't
matter to anyone. Martin owns the core libraries and can comment further.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I
consult a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can
perfectly live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same
HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com
wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at
wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of
the original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the
removal process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I
decorated the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the
undecorated one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list,
the listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal
to the one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener)) {
a listener decoration can be smart enough to not only check against itself,
but also against its delegate.
What do you think?
I could prepare a patch for the *ExpressionHelper classes.
Best regards,
Mario
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
Probably you avoid the map, but it requires to decorate the listener again,
right?
If you think about the tons of observable values and add/removeListener
operations in an tree view when scrolling it might get costly and put pressure
on the GC.
Anyway, I will be more than happy to assist with a cleaner solution by
introduction an interface like DecoratedChangeListener which provides a special
.equalsChangeListener(ChangeListener other) method.
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:55 schrieb Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
Hi Mario,
even if your proposal gets accepted, you would still depend on an
implementation detail of JavaFX, which is always good to avoid.
To sum up, my second proposal compared to your current solution:
(+) your equals() stays symmetric;
(+) no need for an extra Map of listeners.
My second proposal compared to your desired solution if your proposal
is accepted:
(+) your equals() stays symmetric;
(+) you don't depend on an implementation detail in JavaFX.
Best,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Mario Ivankovits
ma...@datenwort.atmailto:ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
The only thing which I ask for is to flip this „if in the *ExpressionHelper
classes:
So, JavaFX does not break anything and it is up to the app developer to take
the risk or not.
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener))
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:42 schrieb Kevin Rushforth
kevin.rushfo...@oracle.commailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com:
If you are talking about a change to the JavaFX API, we are not likely to
accept such a change if it breaks the contract of equals() or hashcode(). In
your own app it may not matter, but it is dangerous to assume it won't
matter to anyone. Martin owns the core libraries and can comment further.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I
consult a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can
perfectly live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same
HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula
tomas.mik...@gmail.commailto:tomas.mik...@gmail.com
wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits
ma...@datenwort.atmailto:ma...@datenwort.at
wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to decorate
ChangeListener added to it.
Today this is somewhat complicated to implement, as I have to keep a map of
the original listener to the decorated one to being able to handle the
removal process of a listener. Because the outside World did not know that I
decorated the listener and the instance passed in to removeListener ist the
undecorated one.
We can make things easier with a small change in
ExpressionHelper.removeListener. When iterating through the listener list,
the listener passed in as argument to removeListener is asked if it is equal
to the one stored
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip
Re: *PropertyBase vs Simple*Property
Why not i expect the property to be fully initialize so this would be a
breaking change in behavior.
Tom
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:54 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Tom Schindl
tom.schi...@bestsolution.at wrote:
Hi Richard,
Coming back to this old thread and now that we are using lamdas all over
I guess we could take one more look into that.
I've prototyped an initial version by introducing a new internal type
named InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty (not the best name ever!) - see
code pasted below.
And now one can write code like this:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(this,
viewport, (o) - {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
} );
}
return viewport;
}
instead of
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new ObjectPropertyBaseRectangle2D() {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
@Override
public Object getBean() {
return ImageView.this;
}
@Override
public String getName() {
return viewport;
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Nice idea. Just to get the comparison to status quo more fair, you
don't need to override getBean() and getName() methods:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new SimpleObjectPropertyRectangle2D(this, viewport) {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Regards,
Tomas
Which allows us to get rid of most of the ObjectPropertyBase sublcasses.
Tom
package com.sun.javafx.property;
import java.util.function.Consumer;
import javafx.beans.property.SimpleObjectProperty;
public final class InvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT extends
SimpleObjectPropertyT {
private final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer;
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(T initialValue, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean, name);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, T
initialValue, final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean,name,initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidationConsumer.accept(this);
}
}
On 22.01.13 10:30, Richard
Re: *PropertyBase vs Simple*Property
Ah i missed you passing them to the constructor.
Still i don't see this as much an improvement because we still create a vast
amount of anon inner classes.
Tom
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 22.03.2014 um 16:23 schrieb Tom Schindl tom.schi...@bestsolution.at:
Why not i expect the property to be fully initialize so this would be a
breaking change in behavior.
Tom
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:54 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Tom Schindl
tom.schi...@bestsolution.at wrote:
Hi Richard,
Coming back to this old thread and now that we are using lamdas all over
I guess we could take one more look into that.
I've prototyped an initial version by introducing a new internal type
named InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty (not the best name ever!) - see
code pasted below.
And now one can write code like this:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(this,
viewport, (o) - {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
} );
}
return viewport;
}
instead of
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new ObjectPropertyBaseRectangle2D() {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
@Override
public Object getBean() {
return ImageView.this;
}
@Override
public String getName() {
return viewport;
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Nice idea. Just to get the comparison to status quo more fair, you
don't need to override getBean() and getName() methods:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new SimpleObjectPropertyRectangle2D(this, viewport) {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Regards,
Tomas
Which allows us to get rid of most of the ObjectPropertyBase sublcasses.
Tom
package com.sun.javafx.property;
import java.util.function.Consumer;
import javafx.beans.property.SimpleObjectProperty;
public final class InvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT extends
SimpleObjectPropertyT {
private final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer;
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(T initialValue, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean, name);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, T
initialValue, final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean,name,initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be null);
}
Re: Ability to decorate ChangeListener
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at wrote:
Probably you avoid the map, but it requires to decorate the listener again,
right?
Right. For a pair of addListener-removeListener calls, you have 2
decorations instead of 1. I usually think of the costs in asymptotic
terms: if 1 decoration is cheap, then 2 decorations are cheap as well.
Or, if we can afford n decorations, then we can probably afford 2n
decorations. I know this is not quite true in real world (200ms is not
the same as 100ms), but is a good way to think about complexity.
If you think about the tons of observable values and add/removeListener
operations in an tree view when scrolling it might get costly and put
pressure on the GC.
removeListener creates one extra short-lived object. I don't know if
it is still true for the current garbage collector in Hotspot, but a
while ago I read that creating a lot of cheap short-lived objects is
fine for the GC.
Regards,
Tomas
Anyway, I will be more than happy to assist with a cleaner solution by
introduction an interface like DecoratedChangeListener which provides a
special .equalsChangeListener(ChangeListener other) method.
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:55 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
Hi Mario,
even if your proposal gets accepted, you would still depend on an
implementation detail of JavaFX, which is always good to avoid.
To sum up, my second proposal compared to your current solution:
(+) your equals() stays symmetric;
(+) no need for an extra Map of listeners.
My second proposal compared to your desired solution if your proposal
is accepted:
(+) your equals() stays symmetric;
(+) you don't depend on an implementation detail in JavaFX.
Best,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at
wrote:
The only thing which I ask for is to flip this „if in the *ExpressionHelper
classes:
So, JavaFX does not break anything and it is up to the app developer to take
the risk or not.
if (listener.equals(changeListeners[index])) {
If we flip this to
if (changeListeners[index].equals(listener))
Am 22.03.2014 um 15:42 schrieb Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com:
If you are talking about a change to the JavaFX API, we are not likely to
accept such a change if it breaks the contract of equals() or hashcode(). In
your own app it may not matter, but it is dangerous to assume it won't
matter to anyone. Martin owns the core libraries and can comment further.
-- Kevin
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
Hi Thomas!
Thanks for your input. Because I want to decorated listeners added by JavaFX
core I can not use the sub/unsub pattern.
Your second proposal is almost what I do right now. In removeListener I
consult a map where the decorated listeners and their undecorated one lives.
Regarding the symmetric doubts. Such listeners will always be removed by
passing in the undecorated object to removeListener.
They should act like a transparent proxy.
Even if this breaks the equals paradigm, in this special case I can
perfectly live with an equals/hashCode implementation like this below.
It won’t break your app; as long as both objects do not live in the same
HashSet/Map …. for sure - but why should they?
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj)
{
return obj == delegate; // this == obj
}
@Override
public int hashCode()
{
return delegate.hashCode();
}
Regards,
Mario
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
A simpler and more universal solution is to also override removeListener:
public void removeListener(ChangeListener? super T listener) {
super.removeListener(decorated(listener));
}
And the equals() method on decorated listeners only compares the
delegates (thus is symmetric).
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com
wrote:
The suspicious thing about your solution is that your smart
implementation of equals() is not symmetric.
In case the observable value is visible only within your project, you
could do this:
interface Subscription {
void unsubscribe();
}
class MyObservableValueT implements ObservableValueT {
public Subscription subscribe(ChangeListener? extends T listener) {
ChangeListenerT decorated = decorate(listener);
addListener(decorated);
return () - removeListener(decorated);
}
}
and use subscribe()/unsubscribe() instead of addListener()/removeListener():
Subscription sub = observableValue.subscribe(listener);
// ...
sub.unsubscribe();
Of course this is not possible if you need to pass the observable
value to the outside world as ObservableValue.
Regards,
Tomas
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Mario Ivankovits ma...@datenwort.at
wrote:
Hi!
In one of my ObservableValue implementations I do have the need to
Re: *PropertyBase vs Simple*Property
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Tom Schindl
tom.schi...@bestsolution.at wrote:
Ah i missed you passing them to the constructor.
Still i don't see this as much an improvement because we still create a vast
amount of anon inner classes.
Sure, I just wanted to get the baseline for comparison right.
Tomas
Tom
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 22.03.2014 um 16:23 schrieb Tom Schindl tom.schi...@bestsolution.at:
Why not i expect the property to be fully initialize so this would be a
breaking change in behavior.
Tom
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 22.03.2014 um 14:54 schrieb Tomas Mikula tomas.mik...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Tom Schindl
tom.schi...@bestsolution.at wrote:
Hi Richard,
Coming back to this old thread and now that we are using lamdas all over
I guess we could take one more look into that.
I've prototyped an initial version by introducing a new internal type
named InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty (not the best name ever!) - see
code pasted below.
And now one can write code like this:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(this,
viewport, (o) - {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
} );
}
return viewport;
}
instead of
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new ObjectPropertyBaseRectangle2D() {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
@Override
public Object getBean() {
return ImageView.this;
}
@Override
public String getName() {
return viewport;
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Nice idea. Just to get the comparison to status quo more fair, you
don't need to override getBean() and getName() methods:
public final ObjectPropertyRectangle2D viewportProperty() {
if (viewport == null) {
viewport = new SimpleObjectPropertyRectangle2D(this, viewport) {
@Override
protected void invalidated() {
invalidateWidthHeight();
impl_markDirty(DirtyBits.NODE_VIEWPORT);
impl_geomChanged();
}
};
}
return viewport;
}
Regards,
Tomas
Which allows us to get rid of most of the ObjectPropertyBase sublcasses.
Tom
package com.sun.javafx.property;
import java.util.function.Consumer;
import javafx.beans.property.SimpleObjectProperty;
public final class InvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT extends
SimpleObjectPropertyT {
private final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer;
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(T initialValue, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(initialValue);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be
null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, final
ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean, name);
if( invalidationConsumer == null ) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException(Consumer can not be
null);
}
this.invalidationConsumer = invalidationConsumer;
}
/**
* The constructor of {@code ObjectProperty}
*
* @param bean
*the bean of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param name
*the name of this {@code ObjectProperty}
* @param initialValue
*the initial value of the wrapped value
* @param invalidationConsumer
* the consumer to be called when the bean is
invalidated
*/
public InvalidatedSimpleObjectProperty(Object bean, String name, T
initialValue, final ConsumerInvalidatedSimpleObjectPropertyT
invalidationConsumer) {
super(bean,name,initialValue);
if(
Re: LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF when building under windows
Hi Kevin, Many thanks for that - that has solved the problem! Perhaps the wiki pagehttps://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/OpenJFX/Building+OpenJFXshould be updated to note that SP1 should be installed as well as vanilla VS2010? I would do it myself, but don't have the privileges. Thanks, Michael On 22 March 2014 14:46, Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com wrote: Do you have VS 2010 Service Pack 1? I've seen this failure on machines that don't have SP1 installed. -- Kevin Michael Berry wrote: Hi, I'm currently trying to build OpenJFX from source on Windows - I've followed the instructions on the build page and have Visual Studio 2010, the June 2010 directx sdk, cygwin and its relevant modules installed. However, when building it fails at the buildJavaFXPackage task (output below.) I'm not sure if those warnings are normal or not, but they definitely look suspicious. It seems the actual error that's stopping things is the fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt line, though all I've found searching around for that error is that incremental:off should be set to avoid it, which it already is in the gradle task. Any ideas? Thanks, Michael :fxml:jar :fxml:assemble :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager javafxpackager.cpp C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(258) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(269) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(286) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(426) : warning C4996: 'getenv': This function or variable may be unsafe. Consider using _dupenv_s instead. To disable deprecation,use _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS. See online help for details. C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/INCLUDE\stdlib.h(433) : see declaration of 'getenv'LINK : fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager FAILED FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. * Where: Build file 'C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\build.gradle' line: 1817 * What went wrong: Execution failed for task ':fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager'. Process 'command 'C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/BIN/link.exe'' finished with non-zero exit value 1123
Re: LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF when building under windows
Glad this solved your problem. I added SP1 to the Wiki page. -- Kevin Michael Berry wrote: Hi Kevin, Many thanks for that - that has solved the problem! Perhaps the wiki page https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/OpenJFX/Building+OpenJFX should be updated to note that SP1 should be installed as well as vanilla VS2010? I would do it myself, but don't have the privileges. Thanks, Michael On 22 March 2014 14:46, Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com mailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com wrote: Do you have VS 2010 Service Pack 1? I've seen this failure on machines that don't have SP1 installed. -- Kevin Michael Berry wrote: Hi, I'm currently trying to build OpenJFX from source on Windows - I've followed the instructions on the build page and have Visual Studio 2010, the June 2010 directx sdk, cygwin and its relevant modules installed. However, when building it fails at the buildJavaFXPackage task (output below.) I'm not sure if those warnings are normal or not, but they definitely look suspicious. It seems the actual error that's stopping things is the fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt line, though all I've found searching around for that error is that incremental:off should be set to avoid it, which it already is in the gradle task. Any ideas? Thanks, Michael :fxml:jar :fxml:assemble :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager javafxpackager.cpp C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(258) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(269) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(286) : warning C4018: '' : signed/unsigned mismatch C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\modules\fxpackager\src\main\native\javafxpackager\win\javafxpackager.cpp(426) : warning C4996: 'getenv': This function or variable may be unsafe. Consider using _dupenv_s instead. To disable deprecation,use _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS. See online help for details. C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/INCLUDE\stdlib.h(433) : see declaration of 'getenv'LINK : fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file invalid or corrupt :fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager FAILED FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. * Where: Build file 'C:\Users\Michael\Documents\JFX8-dev\build.gradle' line: 1817 * What went wrong: Execution failed for task ':fxpackager:buildJavaFXPackager'. Process 'command 'C:/Program Files (x86)/Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0/VC/BIN/link.exe'' finished with non-zero exit value 1123
Blog post: Trigger processing after a period of inactivity
Hi all, I just want to quickly inform that I have a post on how to defer processing of user input until the user has been inactive for a certain amount of time. http://tomasmikula.github.io/blog/2014/03/22/trigger-processing-after-a-period-of-inactivity.html Best regards, Tomas
Adding GStreamer plugins
Hi all, I've managed to clone and build OpenJFX successfully, and am now in the process of trying to see how feasible it would be to add support for other media formats. As a first port of call I'm attempting to see if I can get the framework accepting the Matroska plugin, but seem to be coming a bit unstuck on the native side of things (including the plugin with GStreamer.) I've made the relevant modifications on the Java side of things to persuade the platform to accept MKV files and pass them down to the GStreamer layer, and that compiles and runs without any issues. However, I'm not sure if I'm going about including the matroska plugin in the right way - I've currently done the following: - Downloaded the latest version of the plugins from here ( http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/src/gst-plugins-good/), then added the matroska one to the modules/media/src/main/native/gstreamer/plugins/ folder, as well as the modules/media/src/main/native/gstreamer/gstreamer-lite/gst-plugins-good/gst/ folder (I'm unsure of this - should I add it to both these folders?). - Added all the C files from the first folder mentioned above to the plugins.vcxproj file - Added the relevant files and directory to Makefile.gstplugins - Called the additional relevant plugin_init() function in gstplugins-lite.c However, after the above I still get the same result having touched none of the native code, that being that GSTMediaPlayer throws a MediaException with flag 257, which seems to mean it couldn't create the required media from the given location. So at this point I'm a bit stuck really - of course, the whole task may be much more complicated than I'm assuming it should be. I'm not even sure if the default gradle sdk task is actually reflecting the changes I've made - certainly gstreamer-lite.dll seems to be exactly the same size as before, though I'm unsure if the additional plugin is meant to be embedded in this file or not. I'm experienced with Java but much less so with C++, and completely new to gradle (as of yesterday.) Is there anything obvious I'm not doing correctly, and if so would someone be kind enough to give me a bit of a nudge in the right direction? Many thanks, Michael
