RFR: 8240692: Cleanup of the javafx property objects

[Nir Lisker]

On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 00:30:21 GMT, Tom Schindl <github.com+52631+tomsontom at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> That doesn't seem right. The additional fields are captured in the
>> anonymous class anyway (same as in lambdas).
>> 
>> On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:53 AM Tom Schindl <notifications at github.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I can somehow remember asking Richard Bair why JavaFX internally does not
>>> use Simple* but creates the anonymous subclasses and he said it's memory
>>> reason - Simple* uses more memory because of the additional fields
>>>
>>> —
>>> You are receiving this because you were assigned.
>>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>>> <https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/141?email_source=notifications&email_token=AI5QOM5SILAYZUP3TZVCIW3RGGEHTA5CNFSM4LDJHCF2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEODG4OY#issuecomment-596012603>,
>>> or unsubscribe
>>> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI5QOM2UNAZKYJUMYJSER7TRGGEHTANCNFSM4LDJHCFQ>
>>> .
>>>
>
> the subclass saves the owner field who is a static null, not?

>From what I see, they save the same data.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/141