On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 15:02:22 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I prefer `subscribe` with overloads, as this comes closest to the existing >> naming scheme of JavaFX listener operations (`addListener` / >> `removeListener` with overloads). >> >> I would also like to see a subscription-style API that works with the >> existing listener types. This has the advantage of not needing a wrapper for >> each listener registration, and it can be a drop-in replacement in many >> places where JavaFX listeners are used today. >> >> My suggestion is to have the following new operations: >> * `subscribe` (`Runnable`, `Consumer`, `BiConsumer`) >> * `subscribeListener` (`InvalidationListener`, `ChangeListener`) >> >> This pairs nicely with the existing operations: >> * `addListener` (`InvalidationListener`, `ChangeListener`) >> * `removeListener` (`InvalidationListener`, `ChangeListener`) > >> My suggestion is to have the following new operations: >> >> * `subscribe` (`Runnable`, `Consumer`, `BiConsumer`) > > This seems reasonable. I could be talked into the longer names, but I prefer > the overloaded `subscribe` name. > >> * `subscribeListener` (`InvalidationListener`, `ChangeListener`) > > This might be a useful follow-on Enhancement, but I wouldn't do it as part of > this one. I prefer short names here as often there will be a lambda or method reference following it that makes it clear what you're doing, so I guess that's a vote for `subscribe` plus overrides then. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1069#discussion_r1245374847
