Sounds good, thank you very much!! -Larry
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Jonathan Giles <jonathan.gi...@oracle.com> wrote: > > I think in this situation you're right - I just made the change locally and > did a full build of the SDK and all apps, and everything compiles. My > Jira-foo is not strong enough to find the issue I'm thinking of, but I do > recall an issue in one place in the TableView API about generics being added > and it breaking something. I wish I could find it - I'll keep looking in any > case. > > I will file a new JBS issue and will propose this change. We can try to put > it into JDK 9 and give it time to bake, and see if anyone comes forward due > to being broken by it... > > -- Jonathan > > On 26/11/15 6:46 AM, Richard Bair wrote: >> You should be able to add generics compatibly, you just can't change the >> generics signature. One shot to get it right IIRC. >> >>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 8:57 AM, Jonathan Giles <jonathan.gi...@oracle.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> It was an oversight at the time, and (from memory) is now a breaking change >>> to fix it, so for now it remains as it is, sadly. >>> >>> -- Jonathan >>> Sent from a touch device. Please excuse my brevity. >>> >>>> On 26 November 2015 03:33:04 GMT+13:00, Lawrence Parker >>>> <la...@answerrocket.com> wrote: >>>> Seems like getTableRow() should return TableRow<S> instead of just >>>> TableRow. That way I wouldn’t have to cast getItem(). >>>> >>>> >>>> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/javafx/api/javafx/scene/control/TableCell.html >>>> <https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/javafx/api/javafx/scene/control/TableCell.html> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> @Override >>>> public void updateItem(Boolean isEnabled, boolean empty) { >>>> ... >>>> TestCase testCase = (TestCase)getTableRow().getItem(); >>>> >>>> This would be nicer: >>>> >>>> TestCase testCase = getTableRow().getItem(); >>>> >>>> Seems like an easy change to the getTableRow() method: >>>> >>>> public class TableCell<S,T> extends IndexedCell<T> { >>>> ... >>>> public final TableRow getTableRow() { return tableRow.get(); } >>>> >>>> >>>> Was this an oversight, or is there a reason that getTableRow() needs to >>>> return TableRow instead of TableRow<S>? >>>> >>>> Thanks for any help. >>>> >>>> -Larry >
