Using your own builders is fine, I mean you best not use the deprecated ones as they will be disappearing.
On Aug 29, 2013, at 10:56 PM, Tom Eugelink <t...@tbee.org> wrote: > > I know, the question was based on the "best to cycle off builders" remark, > then what is advised to use as an alternative? > > Tom > > > On 2013-08-30 06:56, Richard Bair wrote: >> You can still use your own Builders and plug them into FXML. Its just that >> the built in set won't be there. But the Builder base class and all the FXML >> support is still there. All mentioned in that long thread :-D >> >> Richard >> >> On Aug 29, 2013, at 9:50 PM, Tom Eugelink <t...@tbee.org> wrote: >> >>> This week I ran into the problem that I needed to provide a date format >>> (attribute in FXML) to one of my controls. So I needed a way to convert a >>> string to DateFormat, or even a comma separated list to a list of >>> DateFormats. This I solved with a builder for that control. How would one >>> solved that without builders? (What is the alternative to builders?) >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> On 2013-08-29 22:42, Richard Bair wrote: >>>> Deprecated in 8 and removed from the JavaDoc, gone in 9 (will be available >>>> as a separately downloadable Jar so you can keep using them, but they >>>> won't be updated). We're removing them from samples. >>>> >>>> Best to cycle off the builders. >>>> >>>> Richard >>>> >>>> On Aug 29, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Felix Bembrick <felix.bembr...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Jonathan, >>>>> >>>>> So what is Oracle's current position on this? Are Builders in or out? If >>>>> out, when will they be removed and how? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 30 August 2013 05:31, Jonathan Giles <jonathan.gi...@oracle.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> You can catch up on the back story here: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2013-March/006725.html >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Jonathan >>>>>> >>>>>> On 30/08/2013 7:06 a.m., Felix Bembrick wrote: >>>>>>> I was not privy to the original discussion but I am lead to believe that >>>>>> Builders are no longer considered fashionable and that we are advised not >>>>>> to use them. >>>>>>> While I realise that every type of Node basically needed its own >>>>>> Builder, could someone please outline why this situation has arisen? Is >>>>>> it >>>>>> something to do with "fluent APIs" themselves or some other reason? >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Felix >>> > >
