Hi Christian, Thank you very much for your message and for following up on this discussion.
As I had mentioned about a year ago, an out-of-the-box implementation might not be too good of an idea as it would be quite opinionated about how to integrate jOOQ with JavaFX, so this got off our radar again. But perhaps, we're missing out on some really low hanging fruit? Do you have any specific ideas about what you might expect? Best Regards, Lukas 2017-04-16 11:09 GMT+02:00 Christian Master <[email protected]>: > Hi, > any news on the JavaFx Property topic? > Would be great for DB & JavaFx apps. > Thx. > > Am Mittwoch, 27. April 2016 16:14:32 UTC+2 schrieb Lukas Eder: >> >> Yes, code generation has a different scale of "easy", I know :) >> >> 2016-04-27 14:43 GMT+02:00 <[email protected]>: >> >>> Dear Lukas, >>> >>> yes, I already had a look into the source and it can be "easily" done. >>> I'll get back if I get in trouble ;-) >>> >>> Thank you, Peter >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "jOOQ User Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
