Since CSS is implicitly tied to layout, validateLayout() seems to be enough.
I don't like "verify" or "check" - To me, these imply a method that is doing checks only and not changing state. A "verify" method would be something that returns a boolean or throws an exception. Scott On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Ali Ebrahimi <ali.ebrahimi1...@gmail.com>wrote: > just my suggestions: > validation is a side effect free concept. but your validate contains css & > layout processing for Node, so validate is very poor name in this case. > May be better use computeBounds instead. > But alternates for validate( if method is a side effect free): > verify() > verfifyNode() > verifyBounds() > checkNode() > checkBounds() > > best Regards > Ali Ebrahimi > > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Martin Sladecek > <martin.slade...@oracle.com>wrote: > > > The plan is to have a final validate() method. > > Anyway, does anybody have a better suggestion? The validate should do > both > > CSS and layout and I would like to avoid method name that's too > descriptive > > (like validateLayoutAndCSS()) if possible. > > I think the most important thing about the method is that it validates > the > > bounds/metrics of the Node, so maybe validateBounds() ? > > > > -Martin > > > > > > On 07/08/2013 01:52 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> The validate()/isValid() in AWT/Swing are often overridden by user apps > >> for tasks that have nothing to do with the layout. And this causes a > lot of > >> problems. > >> > >> -- > >> best regards, > >> Anthony > >> > >> On 07/08/13 15:20, Pavel Safrata wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> one more discussion topic: perhaps the "validate" name is too general? > >>> Maybe we can come up with more descriptive name? There are all kinds of > >>> nodes and sometimes this name can be misleading (not ringing the layout > >>> bell at all). For example TextField.validate() may look like validating > >>> the input. Also I wouldn't be surprised if users run into problems with > >>> custom nodes having their "validate" methods for different purposes. > >>> Pavel > >>> > >>> On 3.7.2013 14:33, Martin Sladecek wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> JIRA: https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/**browse/RT-31133< > https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-31133> > >>>> > >>>> I propose a single method "public final void validate()" to be added > >>>> to Node class. The validate method would ensure that the metrics > >>>> (layout bounds) of the Node are valid with regards to the current > >>>> scenegraph (CSS & layout). > >>>> > >>>> Together with this change, Parent.layout() will be deprecated. > >>>> > >>>> In my current implementation, validate() method works only if the Node > >>>> is in a Scene. To make it work without a Scene, we'd need to do do > >>>> some small adjustments to CSS (doesn't work with getScene() == null). > >>>> But I'm not sure if such feature would be useful. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> -Martin > >>>> > >>> > >>> > > >
