[API Review]: Node validation

[Martin Sladecek]

This might work for CSS, but won't for layout. The second example won't 
work because you'd just do layout of the node itself. It might get a 
different size from it's parent during the next layout pass (and the 
parent from it's parent, etc...). So the layout will look different 
after the next pulse. This is why we need more than layout() call and 
it's not just about adding the CSS.

Regards,
-Martin

On 07/10/2013 08:25 PM, steve.x.northover at oracle.com wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> How about exposing the concept of applying CCS to the programmer? 
> Let's say we add  applyCSS() that does exactly what it says (applies 
> CSS when called).
>
> Here are a few use cases:
>
> 1) Positioning a popup:
>
>     node.applyCSS()
>     node.autosize();
>     // width and height are now valid
>
>     node.applyCSS();
>     // pref width and height are now valid
>
> 2) Taking a snapshot:
>
>     node.applyCSS();
>     node.autosize();
>     node. layout()
>     // take the snapshot (when talking multiple snapshots, don't need 
> to reapply CSS)
>
> 3) Find the location of a child control:
>
>     node.applyCSS();
>     node.autosize();
>     node.layout();
>     // find the child control by id, the bounds are valid
>
> Richard had talked about applying the CSS automatically so that when 
> you ask for the width etc., if the width is not calculated, it gets 
> calculated and returned.  There is nothing in the applyCSS() API the 
> precludes us from writing this automatic code in the future. In that 
> case, applyCSS() would become a hint or a no-op.
>
> Steve
>
>
> On 10/07/2013 2:50 AM, Martin Sladecek wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> -Martin
>>
>> On 07/09/2013 05:06 PM, Pavel Safrata wrote:
>>> To me this sounds best so far. Perhaps updateVisuals() would be even 
>>> better?
>>> Pavel
>>>
>>> On 8.7.2013 18:45, Scott Palmer wrote:
>>>> validateVisuals() ?
>>>> Or something with the word "visual" as it combines layout and other 
>>>> CSS
>>>> information.
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Richard Bair 
>>>> <richard.bair at oracle.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> OK, just throwing something wild out there. Right now we have a 
>>>>> layout
>>>>> pass and a css pass. Can they be combined? Can we combine them 
>>>>> just into
>>>>> something that happens during layout? And can the existing "layout()"
>>>>> method be the thing that kicks it all off?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wild and crazy but just throwing it out there (personally I'm
>>>>> uncomfortable conflating CSS and layout as I believe there will be 
>>>>> use
>>>>> cases to do one and not the other at times).
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 8, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Scott Palmer <swpalmer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Since CSS is implicitly tied to layout, validateLayout() seems to be
>>>>> enough.
>>>>>> I don't like "verify" or "check" - To me, these imply a method 
>>>>>> that is
>>>>>> doing checks only and not changing state.  A "verify" method 
>>>>>> would be
>>>>>> something that returns a boolean or throws an exception.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Ali Ebrahimi 
>>>>>> <ali.ebrahimi1781 at gmail.com
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> just my suggestions:
>>>>>>> validation is a side effect free concept. but your validate 
>>>>>>> contains
>>>>> css &
>>>>>>> layout processing for  Node, so validate is very poor name in 
>>>>>>> this case.
>>>>>>> May be better use computeBounds instead.
>>>>>>> But alternates for validate( if method is a side effect free):
>>>>>>> verify()
>>>>>>> verfifyNode()
>>>>>>> verifyBounds()
>>>>>>> checkNode()
>>>>>>> checkBounds()
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> best Regards
>>>>>>> Ali Ebrahimi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Martin Sladecek
>>>>>>> <martin.sladecek at oracle.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The plan is to have a final validate() method.
>>>>>>>> Anyway, does anybody have a better suggestion? The validate 
>>>>>>>> should do
>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>> CSS and layout and I would like to avoid method name that's too
>>>>>>> descriptive
>>>>>>>> (like validateLayoutAndCSS()) if possible.
>>>>>>>> I think the most important thing about the method is that it 
>>>>>>>> validates
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> bounds/metrics of the Node, so maybe validateBounds() ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Martin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 07/08/2013 01:52 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The validate()/isValid() in AWT/Swing are often overridden by 
>>>>>>>>> user
>>>>> apps
>>>>>>>>> for tasks that have nothing to do with the layout. And this 
>>>>>>>>> causes a
>>>>>>> lot of
>>>>>>>>> problems.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>> best regards,
>>>>>>>>> Anthony
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 07/08/13 15:20, Pavel Safrata wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>> one more discussion topic: perhaps the "validate" name is too
>>>>> general?
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe we can come up with more descriptive name? There are 
>>>>>>>>>> all kinds
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> nodes and sometimes this name can be misleading (not ringing the
>>>>> layout
>>>>>>>>>> bell at all). For example TextField.validate() may look like
>>>>> validating
>>>>>>>>>> the input. Also I wouldn't be surprised if users run into 
>>>>>>>>>> problems
>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> custom nodes having their "validate" methods for different 
>>>>>>>>>> purposes.
>>>>>>>>>> Pavel
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3.7.2013 14:33, Martin Sladecek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> JIRA: https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/**browse/RT-31133<
>>>>>>> https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-31133>
>>>>>>>>>>> I propose a single method "public final void validate()" to 
>>>>>>>>>>> be added
>>>>>>>>>>> to Node class. The validate method would ensure that the 
>>>>>>>>>>> metrics
>>>>>>>>>>> (layout bounds) of the Node are valid with regards to the 
>>>>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>>>>> scenegraph (CSS & layout).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Together with this change, Parent.layout() will be deprecated.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In my current implementation, validate() method works only 
>>>>>>>>>>> if the
>>>>> Node
>>>>>>>>>>> is in a Scene. To make it work without a Scene, we'd need to 
>>>>>>>>>>> do do
>>>>>>>>>>> some small adjustments to CSS (doesn't work with getScene() ==
>>>>> null).
>>>>>>>>>>> But I'm not sure if such feature would be useful.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> -Martin
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>