On Fri, 27 May 2022 23:31:42 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
> I reviewed the public API changes, and this looks like a great addition to
> JavaFX bindings. I think there might be time to get this into JavaFX 19,
> presuming that there are no issues with the testing or implementation, so
> let's
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:46:40 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:46:40 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 20:17:36 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>> John Hendrikx has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix wording
>
> Yes, I definitely want to be one of the reviewers. I'll need to review the
> CSR in any case.
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 17:06:12 GMT, yosbits wrote:
> The reason I think the Null Safe explanation is incorrect is because In the
> interest of fairness, I feel it would be better to have an example of using
> the Optional API when comparing the existing way of writing to the new way of
>
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:46:40 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:46:40 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:46:40 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:38:43 GMT, yosbits wrote:
> This PR is considered a design change that delegates multiple
> responsibilities to the basic JavaFX class ObservableValue. The balance
> between implementation complexity and convenience seems to be a point of
> contention.
If you could do
On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:46:40 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> This is an implementation of the proposal in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
>> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
>> good test coverage.
>>
>> This
> This is an implementation of the proposal in
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8274771 that me and Nir Lisker
> (@nlisker) have been working on. It's a complete implementation including
> good test coverage.
>
> This was based on https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/434 but with a
11 matches
Mail list logo
