Re: Problem editing FXML documents with latest SceneBuilder 8.2.0 with a"${attrname}" text property

On 22.11.2016 10:34, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Not sure whether this is the correct list, if not, please advise where to > post such observations. > > The latest SceneBuilder 8.2.0 (in this case the 64-bit Windows-Version) seems > to not be able to > process 'text="${

Hmm, another attempt to get information on deploying javax.script (via FXMLLoader) and SceneBuilder and javax.script languages ...

Quite a while ago I asked about javax.script deployments in JavaFX (i.e. when instrumentating javax.script languages when FXMLLoader processes FXML files) without getting any answer or pointer so far. So I am wondering whether there is another mailing group (other than this one) where

Re: Hmm, another attempt to get information on deploying javax.script (via FXMLLoader) and SceneBuilder and javax.script languages ...

wrote: > > > On 28.11.2016 12:55, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> So I am wondering whether there is another mailing group (other than this >> one) where questions like >> this can be asked > > There is a JavaFX forum at > https://community.oracle.com/community/ja

Problem editing FXML documents with latest SceneBuilder 8.2.0 with a"${attrname}" text property

Not sure whether this is the correct list, if not, please advise where to post such observations. The latest SceneBuilder 8.2.0 (in this case the 64-bit Windows-Version) seems to not be able to process 'text="${attrname}"' definitions, e.g. for a Label. Such an entry will not be displayed in

Question ad javax.script deployment scenarios ...

Not having found a documentation or references as how javax.script scripting languages get employed in JavaFX, I was wondering whether there is an up-to-date, current documentation of that support, if any at all? E.g. it seems that it is not possible to have different scripting engines execute

Re: Hmm, another attempt to get information on deploying javax.script (via FXMLLoader) and SceneBuilder and javax.script languages ...

On 28.11.2016 14:18, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Dalibor, > > thank you very much for this link, just posted a comparable question there. > > Poking around the questions (many unanswered) posted there, my hopes are not > very high to get an > answer (maybe I am too pessimist

Re: Planning for JavaFX.next

As no one else has asked for it, here it goes: improve javax.script support beyond the e-mail in this list from 2016-12-07, entitled "RFE/Suggestions to improve JavaFX deployment of javax.script (part of Java) engines and script code" by: * introudcing the possibility to define javax.script

Re: What is the process ?

e know if there are any questions on any of this. > > -- Kevin > > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ > [2] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html > [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/9-dev/rt/file/tip/LICENSE > [4] http://bugs.java.com/ > [5] http://o

What is the process ?

Hi there, what is the proper process, if one wishes to contribute. Is there some web site describing it? Where to get the official source from? What kind of license has one to use for patches (AL ;) , GPL, LGPL, etc.)? How about (and where) creating issues for RFEs, how to decide whether an

RFE/Suggestions to improve JavaFX deployment of javax.script (part of Java) engines and script code

For scripting languages that possess javax.script (part of Java since Java 1.6/6!) implementations the JavaFX infrastructure is of a great attractivity. JavaFX would allow script programmers for creating platform independent GUIs to take fully advantage for their own purposes, i.e. "surfing on

t e / s t

In case this e-mail makes it to the openjfx-dev-list, please ignore it. (I have been trying for months to post a message without success.) ---rony

Re: Draft JEP for new Packaging Tool (replacement for javapackager)

On 31.05.2018 02:11, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > I just sent an email to the core-libs-dev alias [1] proposing a new Packaging > Tool as a > replacement for javapackager. If you are interested in this JEP, you can > follow and participate in > the discussion there. > > -- Kevin > > [1]

Re: Table Input

José & Daniel, thank you very much for the information and links! ---rony On 20.06.2018 19:45, José Pereda wrote: > As Daniel points out, the TableView2 control is a Gluon contribution that has > been merged recently > to ControlsFX, but it hasn't been released yet. Actually there is a

Re: Table Input

On 20.06.2018 15:33, Daniel Peintner wrote: > I believe the last time I looked at the TableView2 contribution at > ControlsFX (which can be used as a TableView replacement), commit on focus > lost was implemented/supported. Do you have a link? seems to not

RFE: Allow any javax.script language to be used for script code in HTML event attributes and script elements processed by WebView/WebEngine

Currently it is possible to create one own's browser using WebView where the WebEngine processes script code written in JavaScript for event attributes or for script elements. WebEngine is currently implemented such that only JavaScript gets supported for scripts in HTML (in event attributes or

FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

Using a script engine (javax.script.ScriptEngine) for implementing a FXML controller there are two important information missing in the ScriptContext.ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings supplied to the script used to eval() the script code: * ScriptEngine.FILENAME o This value denotes the file name

Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

On 13.11.2019 16:53, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Actually, in this case, sending an email to this list is the right way to > start this discussion. I > had meant to reply last week, but was out of town (at Devoxx), and busy with > other things. > > Before we take a look at a patch that implements

Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

.script.Compilable and the javax.script.Invocable interfaces). So looking for interested committers who would be willing to mentor this patch. Please advise. ---rony On 06.11.2019 16:05, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Using a script engine (javax.script.ScriptEngine) for implementing a FXML

Correct diff (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

Just for the record: attached the wrong diff, so attaching the correct one to this posting. Sorry for the confusion. ---rony On 13.11.2019 15:14, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Hmm, not getting any feedback so far, so wondering if there are currently any > Java developers who > take

Ad NashornScriptEngine (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

On 13.11.2019 19:50, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > > On 11/13/2019 9:42 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> Will come up with a short reproducible testcase in ooRexx with brief >> comments such that the testcase >> could be understood without the runtime (ooRexx reads alm

Re: Ad NashornScriptEngine (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

On 14.11.2019 16:34, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > On 13.11.2019 19:50, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> On 11/13/2019 9:42 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: ... cut ... >>> To reproduce the testcase one would need ooRexx and the Java bridge >>> BSF4ooRexx (all opensource) fo

Re: Ad NashornScriptEngine (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

On 14.11.2019 22:57, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On 11/14/2019 10:12 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> On 14.11.2019 16:34, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >>> On 13.11.2019 19:50, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >>>> On 11/13/2019 9:42 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> ... cut ...

"Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

On 15.11.2019 16:08, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > On 14.11.2019 22:57, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> On 11/14/2019 10:12 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >>> On 14.11.2019 16:34, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >>>> On 13.11.2019 19:50, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >>>>> O

Re: "Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

As the zip-archive attachment got stripped, for a brief time the zip-archive can be fetched from <https://www.dropbox.com/s/l4uesrwm0iw5vb9/testcaseFXMLLoaderScriptEngines.zip?dl=0>. ---rony On 21.11.2019 15:29, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > On 15.11.2019 16:08, Rony G. Flatsc

Re: RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

Hi Kevin, On 02.03.2020 17:51, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On Thu, 27 Feb 2020 14:36:17 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher > wrote: > >>> Overall this looks good to me. As I mentioned in PR #123 you should fold >>> that the unit test into this PR. >> Removed executable bi

Re: RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

On Wed, 26 Feb 2020 23:37:11 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> @aghaisas can you also review this? > > Overall this looks good to me. As I mentioned in PR #123 you should fold that > the unit test into this PR. Removed executable bits from gradlew (which I manually have added to become able to

Re: [Rev 01] RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

> …9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV The pull request has been updated with 6 additional commits. - Added commits: - 8821d25a: Removed executable bit from gradlew as this causes an error when - 799a8148: Merge branch 'scripttest' into

Re: [Rev 02] RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

> …9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV The pull request has been updated with 1 additional commit. - Added commits: - a42fed5c: corrected wrong test string Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/122/files - new:

Re: RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 15:39:35 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > …9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV OK, forgot to submit an explanatory text related to this fix. Posted [1] which explains the problem and the suggested solution for discuss

RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

…9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV - Commits: - 30539592: Removed/replaced white space. - 5c33d590: fix for JDK-8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME

Re: RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

On Sun, 23 Feb 2020 14:54:32 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> …9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV > > OK, forgot to submit an explanatory text related to this fix. Posted [1] > which explains the problem and the suggested solution

A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

request (although a "WIP" or Draft PR can > be used to illustrate > the concept). > > For my part, this seems like a reasonable enhancement, as long as there are > no compatibility > issues, but it would be good to hear from application developers who heavily &g

Re: Ad suggested test unit for "JDK-8234959 FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV"

s only one can issue: |    ./gradlew -PFULL_TEST=true :systemTests:test --tests ModuleLauncherTest| This will include the suggested WIP test unit "testscriptapp1". ---rony [1] "Contributing to OpenJFX": <https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md> On 18.

Re: "Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

On 23.01.2020 18:09, Anthony Vanelverdinghe wrote: > On 22/01/2020 18:52, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: ... cut ... >> Maybe one more question: there would be an optimization possible by >> compiling scripts for script >> engines that have the javax.script.Compilable interfac

Question ad creating a testcase that needs a jar on class- or module path

How would one go about creating a testcase that needs a jar-file either on the class- or module path? Are there any test units that would demonstrate how to do it? If not, what approach would you suggest (and if so, are there any samples already somewhere to study)? --- Background: for

Re: Question ad creating a testcase that needs a jar on class- or module path

Hi Kevin, On 31.01.2020 16:38, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > And if you need a modular jar, you might look at ModuleLauncherTest instead. thank you very much for this important hint as well! Having no knowledge about gradle it will take me a while to research and digest, but this definitely helps

Re: "Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

Hi Kevin, On 29.01.2020 13:24, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > The RFE you filed is now available here: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238080 thank you very much! Cheers ---rony P.S.: Have not received any automatic notification e-mail so far.

"Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

Just filed a RFE with the following information: * Component: o JavaFX * Subcomponent: o fxml: JavaFX FXML * Synopsis: o "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts" * Descriptions: o "FXMLLoader is able to execute scripts

Re: "Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

FE you filed today, and let you know when > it is transferred in > case there is still a problem with the notification. thank you very much! ---rony > > On 1/22/2020 9:52 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> Hi Anthony, >> >> On 22.01.2020 17:07, Anthony Vanelve

Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

tion developers who heavily > use FXML. +1 ---rony [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234959 > > > On 1/24/2020 7:21 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> Just filed a RFE with the following information: >> >>    * Component: >>    o JavaFX >

Re: Question ad creating a testcase that needs a jar on class- or module path

(briefly discussing the three scenarious how a script controller may define scripts and why the filenames were picked the way they are). * Maybe the explanations/documentations for the bug fix should be posted here upfront for discussion? ---rony On 03.02.2020 15:04, Rony G. Flatscher

Ad suggested test unit for "JDK-8234959 FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV"

For creating a test unit to test whether [1] is present or not, it is necessary to have a Java script engine to test again. As discussed in a different thread it is not advisable to use any concrete, existing Java script engine that is not part of the JDK. Therefore it becomes necessary to come

Re: Question ad running the "systemTests" module tests ...

private void testModuleFXMLScriptTest() throws Exception {    doTestLaunchModule(modulePath7, "myapp7.FXMLScriptTest"); } To run the modular tests only, one can issue therefore:     ./gradlew  -PFULL_TEST=true :systemTests:test --tests ModuleLauncherTest ---rony > On 2/20/2020 1

Question ad running the "systemTests" module tests ...

"build.gradle" contains the project ":systemTests" which defines tests that each run on a separate JVM and use their own Assert methods defined in respective Util.java. They signal success according to the values defined in "Constants.java". The module test "testapp7" that I wrote mimickries

Re: Request for adding my github userid ..

;> >> This will alert the Skara maintainers to check your OCA status and make the >> association. >> >> -- Kevin >> >> >> On 2/22/2020 8:20 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >>> Trying to place my first pull requests via github and received the >

Request for adding my github userid ..

Trying to place my first pull requests via github and received the following e-mail: --- cut --- Hi ronyfla, welcome to this OpenJDK project and thanks for contributing! We do not recognize you as Contributor and need to ensure you have signed the

Re: Question ad running the "systemTests" module tests ...

Kevin, thank you very much for your information! On 19.02.2020 20:44, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > First, make sure that your test class name ends with exactly the string > "Test". Renamed the class such that it ends in "Test" ("FXMLScriptTest"), however this does not cause the class to be loaded

Re: "Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

nd-of-year stress and Christmas vacation?) Any advice? ---rony On 21.11.2019 15:39, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > As the zip-archive attachment got stripped, for a brief time the zip-archive > can be fetched from > <https://www.dropbox.com/s/l4uesrwm0iw5vb9/testcaseFXMLLoader

Re: "Internal review ID : 9062887" (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

Hi Anthony, On 22.01.2020 17:07, Anthony Vanelverdinghe wrote: > Your issue has been converted into a JDK issue, with your testcase attached > [1]. Thank you *very* much for this information! > Normally you should’ve received an e-mail at the time of this conversion, Just searched all my

WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

scripts. > One other thing to consider is that if compilation fails, it might make sense > to log a warning and > fall back to the existing interpreted mode. > > Does anyone else have any concerns with this? > > -- Kevin > > > On 4/14/2020 9:48 AM, Rony G. Flatsch

Re: Ad GraalVM and JavaFX (Re: Remove JavaFX JPMS enforcement

; software into it. (E.g. Log4J and NSMenuFX)(I had to abandon Log4J and fixed > the problems in > NSMenuFX.) > > Am 20.04.20 um 15:26 schrieb Rony G. Flatscher: >> On 20.04.2020 15:06, Michael Paus wrote: >>> This is deviating quite a bit from the original issue of this th

A new WIP (PR # 192) (Re: WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabe

the log history there is a commit message "Make message more pregnant.", it should have read "Make messages more terse." instead|.|| | On 17.04.2020 19:37, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > There is a new WIP at <https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/187> which adds a >

Re: Ad GraalVM and JavaFX (Re: Remove JavaFX JPMS enforcement

best place to get started is at https://github.com/gluonhq/client-samples thank you very much for both, the link and assuring that reflection is still available to apps as well! ---rony > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:30 PM Rony G. Flatscher <mailto:rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at>> wrote: >

Re: RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 16:49:45 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> Removed executable bits from gradlew (which I manually have added to become >> able to run ./gradlew) and pushed it, >> however the commit has not appeared. Not wanting to add more noise, I stop >> until advised differently. > > Btw, I

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

lawlessly with the previous versions of OpenFX. It looks as if Java 14 is needed for the latest OpenFX master, at least for my installation. ---rony > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 6:52 PM Rony G. Flatscher <mailto:rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at>> wrote: > > Being stuck (tried the previo

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

t 2:20:44 PM CDT, Johan Vos wrote: > I have no scientific evidence for this, but I remember issues related to > SSL with some JDK's as well, which may or may not be related to the cacerts > file that is bundled. > > - Johan > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 6:52 PM Rony G. Flatscher

Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

ting both, javax.script.Engine and javax.script.Compilable) as well as controlling the execution of compiled scripts ([javax.script.CompiledScript] (https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/14/docs/api/java.scripting/javax/script/CompiledScript.html)). ---rony > On 4/2/2020 10:41 AM, Rony G.

Re: [Rev 03] RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

> …9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Applying the changes according to the review. - Changes: - all: ht

Re: [Rev 04] RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

> …9: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Remove jcheck whitespace error. - Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/

RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

TODO: ADD DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED FIX HERE. - Commit messages: - Correct error constant. - appease the jcheck script, such that that important trailing Whitespace error can be resolved (why would jcheck not do it automagically as well as expanding tabs?) - Merge master, correct

Question ad CSR (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

; security concerns in the > presence of a security manager. As long as a user-provided class is on the > stack, it will be fine, > but we would need to ensure that. > > -- Kevin > > > On 4/2/2020 10:41 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> After merging master, applying som

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

On 31.03.2020 18:20, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Check your JDK version and gradle version: > > $ java -version > $ gradle -version > > If they look OK, you might try: > > $ rm -rf build > $ gradle clean > > and then do a build. Thank you, Kevin, unfortunately, it does not work out (it fails at

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

On 31.03.2020 19:10, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > That's not the problem. The minimum build number only applies if at the exact > minimum JDK version > in question. You are using 11.0.6 which is > 11 so no problem there. > > One last thing to try: > > $ rm -rf .gradle buildSrc/.gradle buildSrc/build

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

Hmm, noticed a JDK  "minimum jdk build number: 28" minimum build number. Currently using the latest AdoptOpenJDK 11 LTS. If that is the problem which JDK would you suggest to use instead? ---rony On 31.03.2020 18:51, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > On 31.03.2020 18:20, Kevin Ru

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

On 31.03.2020 20:21, Scott Palmer wrote: >> Could not resolve all dependencies for configuration ':apps:lucene'. >   > Multiple build operations failed. >     java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError >     java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class >    

Re: Seeking help with latest master ...

uld be great though, if it worked with the 11 LTS version as well.) ---rony On 31.03.2020 20:36, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > On 31.03.2020 20:21, Scott Palmer wrote: >>> Could not resolve all dependencies for configuration ':apps:lucene'. >>   

Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

s implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts". ---rony On 28.02.2020 19:22, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Here is a WIP [1] implementation of [2]. The WIP is based on [3], which is > currently in review, and > has an appropriate test unit going with it as well, please

Next steps ? (Re: An attempt of a CSR draft ... (Re: A new WIP (PR # 192) (Re: WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoade

ompile with fallback, if Compilable is implemented, compile PI for fine-grained control (2020-04-14): <https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/192> On 22.04.2020 20:01, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > as I am not able to file a CSR with the issue you sugge

An attempt of a CSR draft ... (Re: A new WIP (PR # 192) (Re: WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engin

P: Script compilable+compile PI+fallback: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts #192":  <https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/192> On 20.04.2020 14:58, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > There is a new WIP at <https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/p

Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilabel compile scripts"

on and off throughout an FXML file.) ---rony On 04.04.2020 18:03, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > On 03.04.2020 01:21, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> I see that you updated the PR and sent it for review. >> >> Before we formally review it in the PR, let's fi

Re: [Rev 01] RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

rror message, a > stack trace or a wrap-up into a > RuntimeException (having three different kinds of reporting ScriptExceptions > may be questioned, however none of these > tear down the FXML GUI). Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit si

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Tue, 12 May 2020 17:33:06 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> Suggested CSR: >> >> Summary >> === >> Have javafx.fxml.FXMLLoader compile FXML scripts before evaluating them, if >> the script engine >> implements the javax.script.Compilable in

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Wed, 13 May 2020 09:22:20 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> Doc addition for the CSR: >> = >> The following text was added to the [Introduction to >> FXML](https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/blob/master/modules/javafx.fxml/src/main/do

Re: [Closed] RFR: WIP 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:46:58 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > TODO: ADD DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED FIX HERE. This pull request has been closed without being integrated. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/129

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Sat, 9 May 2020 15:15:52 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> test units for: compile PI+fallback >> >> tests/system/src/testscriptapp2/java/mymod/myapp2/FXMLScriptDeployment2Compile_Off.java >> ... use compile PI to set off compilation of scripts; each script code >>

RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

This WIP adds the ability for a fallback in case compilation of scripts fails, in which case a warning gets issued about this fact and evaluation of the script will be done without compilation. Because of the fallback scripts get compiled with this version by default. It extends PR 187

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:45:30 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > This WIP adds the ability for a fallback in case compilation of scripts > fails, in which case a warning gets issued > about this fact and evaluation of the script will be done without > compilation. Because of the fall

Re: Next steps ? (Re: An attempt of a CSR draft ... (Re: A new WIP (PR # 192) (Re: WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLL

to >> "Introduction to FXML" >> 3. Remove WIP from the title >> >> You can then close the other two PRs (129 and 187). > will do (may take a little bit). > > Cheers > > ---rony > > >> On 4/28/2020 6:15 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >>

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Tue, 12 May 2020 16:51:08 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> I think the approach proposed in this PR is the best solution for this >> enhancement. Go ahead and remove the `WIP` from >> the title, and we can proceed with the review. >> The interface and b

Re: Questions ad JavaScript in JavaFX' WebEngine

ows to denote script languages other than JavaScript, I am interested in evaluating what WebEngine/WebView allows for to support this with any of the Java script engines. ---rony > On 5/8/2020 7:01 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> Wondering which JavaScript engine gets referred to in WebEn

Re: Next steps ? (Re: An attempt of a CSR draft ... (Re: A new WIP (PR # 192) (Re: WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLL

can then close the other two PRs (129 and 187). will do (may take a little bit). Cheers ---rony > On 4/28/2020 6:15 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: >> >> Hi Kevin, >> >> what should be the next steps? >> >> Should I remove "WIP" from the title in

Questions ad JavaScript in JavaFX' WebEngine

Wondering which JavaScript engine gets referred to in WebEngine [1]. In case it is currently (JavaFX 14) Nashorn [2], what happens after Nashorn gets removed from the next [3] version? In case it is WebKit's JavaScriptCore [4] where can one study the interface from WebEngine to it? ---rony

Re: [Rev 02] RFR: 8234959: FXMLLoader does not populate ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings with FILENAME and ARGV

Kevin and Ajit, thank you very much for your reviews! Will apply the changes (including changing CRLF to LF) ASAP. ---rony On 23.03.2020 22:45, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On Sat, 21 Mar 2020 19:19:18 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > >>> Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull reques

Re: Questions ad JavaScript in JavaFX' WebEngine

, if necessary. (Again, this is a very coarse idea at the moment.) ---rony > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 14:17:07, Rony G. Flatscher <mailto:rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at>> wrote: > > On 09.05.2020 17:23, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > > WebEngine uses WebKit's JavaScr

Re: Next steps ? (Re: An attempt of a CSR draft ... (Re: A new WIP (PR # 192) (Re: WIP version with PI compile (Re: A WIP for JDK-8238080 for review/discussion (Re: "Internal review ID 9063426: "FXMLL

Hi Kevin, is there anything I need to do? What are the next steps I should look for? —-rony Rony G. Flatscher (mobil/e) > Am 12.05.2020 um 19:23 schrieb Rony G. Flatscher : > > Hi Kevin, > > in the meantime I have tried to come up with a formulation for the > &qu

Re: Seeking FXML examples with the "onChange" attribute defined for ObservableList, ObservableMap, ObservableSet ...

ner.Change, SetChangeListener.Change) for that purpose, it would be helpful to be pointed at three respective JavaFX classes. ---rony On 28.07.2020 13:18, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > Hi Nir, > > On 27.07.2020 22:39, Nir Lisker wrote: > > Hi Rony, > > > >

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v6]

, thank you very much for your review efforts! Best regards —-rony Rony G. Flatscher (mobil/e) > Am 29.06.2020 um 07:56 schrieb Ajit Ghaisas : > > On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 14:07:24 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher > wrote: > >>> This PR adds a "compile"

Integrated: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 12:45:30 GMT, Rony G. Flatscher wrote: > This PR adds a "compile" process instruction to FXML files with the optional > PI data "true" (default) and "false". The > PI data is turned into a boolean value using "Boolean.par

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v3]

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 00:04:37 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull request with a new target base due to >> a merge or a rebase. The pull request now >> contains 27 commits: >> - Updates to meet Kevin's comment in PR 192 as of May

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v4]

ssue > - [ ] Change must be properly reviewed > > ### Issue > * [JDK-8238080](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238080): > FXMLLoader: if script engines implement >javax.script.Compilable compile scripts > > > ### Download > `$ git fetch https://git.openj

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v4]

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 23:59:47 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Incorporating Kevin's review comments (final int, fix for loop test, >> co

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v5]

ssue > - [ ] Change must be properly reviewed > > ### Issue > * [JDK-8238080](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238080): > FXMLLoader: if script engines implement >javax.script.Compilable compile scripts > > > ### Download > `$ git fetch https://git.openj

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v6]

ssue > - [ ] Change must be properly reviewed > > ### Issue > * [JDK-8238080](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238080): > FXMLLoader: if script engines implement >javax.script.Compilable compile scripts > > > ### Download > `$ git fetch https://git.openj

Re: RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts [v6]

On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 14:41:29 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> Rony G. Flatscher has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Incorporating Kevin's review comments (overlooked some places). > > Looks good.

Re: [Rev 02] RFR: 8238080: FXMLLoader: if script engines implement javax.script.Compilable compile scripts

ssue > - [ ] Change must be properly reviewed > > ### Issue > * [JDK-8238080](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238080): > FXMLLoader: if script engines implement >javax.script.Compilable compile scripts > > > ### Download > `$ git fetch https://git.openj

Seeking FXML examples with the "onChange" attribute defined for ObservableList, ObservableMap, ObservableSet ...

Hi Nir, On 27.07.2020 22:39, Nir Lisker wrote: > Hi Rony, > > I think that this PR is not the place for this question since it only fixes a typo there. sorry, my bad, not realizing that the reply will be taken as part of the PR! This time with a proper new e-mail. --- In

A request for FXML exxamples (Re: [jfx15] Fix mistakes in FX API docs [v3]

On 26.07.2020 12:10, Nir Lisker wrote: >> Fixes https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8246343 and some additional >> fixes in the vicinity. > Nir Lisker has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > VBox and HBox fixes > > -

Not finding installed font family on Windows

Having installed the "IBM Plex" (otf) fonts (e.g. a file like "IBMPlexMono-Text.otf") to the global Windows font directory at "C:\Windows\Fonts" (%windir%\Fonts) the font family "IBM Plex Mono" and the like does not get listed with "javafx.scene.text.Font.getFamilies()". Using

Question ad css' -fx-font-family

Not sure whether these are bugs or working as intended: * setting in a css "-fx-font-family" to:     -fx-font-family: "IBM Plex Mono","Liberation Mono",Consolas,Monaco,Terminus,Courier,monospace; If the first listed font is not found then JavaFX uses the "family=System" rather than