JavaFX and the Missing Interfaces

[Mark Fortner]

I guess the benefit of doing it this way is that it would make it easier to
swap out implementations, and do unit testing/mocking.  The downside if the
API is changing frequently then every release is liable to break something.
 But that's why people have continuous integration servers. :-)

Mark

Cheers,

Mark




On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Daniel Zwolenski <zonski at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Maybe somebody can show how this would work in more concrete terms? I
> > don't even see how it would be practical at all.
> >
>
> As in how it would be used by end developers and to what benefit, or as in
> how to make it workable in the current JFX codebase?
>
>
>
> > Richard
> >
> > On Nov 5, 2012, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Zwolenski <zonski at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > I think we've had this conversation before. Maybe something to do with
> > interfaces being too brittle where if you add a method anyone
> implementing
> > it will now be missing a method, whereas with a base class they can add a
> > stub method?
> > >
> > > Other frameworks use interfaces extensively though (eg Spring,
> > java.util.Collections), generally with positive outcomes.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 06/11/2012, at 5:50 AM, Randahl Fink Isaksen <randahl at rockit.dk>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have been struggling with a number of problems stemming from the way
> > JavaFX is designed – specifically the lack of interfaces for many of the
> > extension points in the class hierarchy.
> > >>
> > >> It takes some thorough explaining with code examples, so instead of
> > just an unformatted e-mail I posted a more readable explanation of the
> > problem on-line:
> > >> Please read
> > http://blog.randahl.dk/2012/11/javafx-and-missing-interfaces.html
> > >>
> > >> I hope we could have a constructive discussion on this matter on this
> > list before I go ahead and file a Jira, so the Jira issue becomes the
> best
> > possible basis for solving the design problem.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks
> > >>
> > >> Randahl
> >
> >
>