[External] : Re: javafx.base and java.desktop

[Kevin Rushforth]

Most of it is the documentation, but there is also the need to find and 
document any cases that could fail. My expectation is that those are 
uninteresting corner cases.

The documentation for the property adapter classes indicates that its 
use is for inter-operating between JavaFX properties and JavaBeans.

We do have one system test that creates a modular test app that mocks up 
a trivial use of a POJO class without the test app itself using 
java.beans. It isn't actually testing beans, but rather testing the 
ability of the property adapter classes to access the user-provided 
class at all when the app is in a module. Adding a dependency on 
java.desktop would be a trivial thing to do in that test's module-info.java.

-- Kevin


On 11/18/2023 6:42 PM, Nir Lisker wrote:
>
>     Perhaps this is the right time to move this forward?
>
>
> I don't see why not. Except for changing the `requires` declaration in 
> the module-info and mentioning it in the docs, is there anything else 
> that needs to be changed?
>
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2023 at 7:48 PM Kevin Rushforth 
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>     We would need to validate the assertion that an app can't doing
>     anything useful without the app itself importing and using
>     java.beans from the java.desktop module.
>
>     At a minimum this would need a CSR specifying this additional
>     requirement that the app must depend on java.desktop in order to
>     use the JavaFX beans property adapter classes.
>
>     If others think this is useful, we could consider this for JavaFX 23.
>
>     -- Kevin
>
>     On 11/18/2023 6:16 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>>>     Perhaps the module can be declared 'requires static'. 
>>
>>     That was my thinking as well, which is captured in
>>     https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8240844
>>
>>     Perhaps this is the right time to move this forward?
>>
>>     -- Kevin
>>
>>
>>     On 11/17/2023 4:06 PM, Nir Lisker wrote:
>>>     Hi,
>>>
>>>     A previous discussion mentioned the removal of AWT dependencies.
>>>     One of the points that Kevin brought up was
>>>
>>>          Refactor Java Beans implementation in javafx.base such that
>>>         java.desktop is optional
>>>
>>>
>>>     John and I looked at this some time ago when we discussed the
>>>     usage of the javafx base module outside of JavaFX, as its
>>>     observables/binding capabilities are suitable for non-GUI
>>>     applications, which currently have to pull in GUI modules as
>>>     dependencies.
>>>
>>>     The dependency is used in the property.adapter packages that
>>>     bridge javafx.base properties with Java Beans. I think that
>>>     these classes are seldom used.
>>>
>>>     What could be a way to deal with that dependency? Perhaps the
>>>     module can be declared 'requires static'. Or extract the adapter
>>>     packages into a different "interop" module (javafx.javabeans)
>>>     like javafx.swing?
>>>
>>>     - Nir
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/openjfx-dev/attachments/20231121/75317328/attachment.htm>