JDK-8222258: Add exclusion scope for LightBase

[Nir Lisker]

The scope is a TrackableObservableList with a single onChanged that marks
dirty the changed nodes. In my preliminary implementation in the Webrev,
when adding a node to a scope, there is an attempt to remove it from he
other one, which if successful, calls its onChange and marks the node
dirty. I don't see the added complexity compared to giving precedence to
one of the lists.

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 3:53 PM Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>
wrote:

>
> On 4/27/2019 1:23 PM, Nir Lisker wrote:
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> For the second question, you outlined three possibilities. My initial
>> thought is that the complexity of moving it from one list to another
>> (which is what happens with child nodes of a parent) is not worth the
>> effort.
>
>
>  The effort is essentially just an attempt to remove the node from the
> other list, or am I missing something?
>
>
> The complexity comes because of binding. It isn't horrible, but it isn't
> as simple as it might initially seem. See the use of VetoableListDecorator
> in Parent.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 10:09 PM Kevin Rushforth <
> kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nir,
>>
>> This seems like it would be a useful addition to the JavaFX 3D lighting
>> API. You highlighted the two things that need to be clearly defined in
>> terms of semantics:
>>
>> 1. Parent node in the inclusion list, descendant node in the exclusion
>> list (or vice versa)
>> 2. A node in both lists
>>
>> I think your main idea about the rules for the first question seems
>> exactly right: a node that is in one list or the other overrides any
>> ancestor node and that will applies to all descendants which are not in
>> one of the lists of scopes. If the inclusion list is empty, it behaves
>> exactly the same as if the root node were the only node in the inclusion
>> list.
>>
>> For the second question, you outlined three possibilities. My initial
>> thought is that the complexity of moving it from one list to another
>> (which is what happens with child nodes of a parent) is not worth the
>> effort. I would recommend that one or the other take precedence
>> (probably the exclusion).
>>
>> -- Kevin
>>
>>
>> On 4/18/2019 9:54 PM, Nir Lisker wrote:
>> > Hi Kevin/Johan,
>> >
>> > I submitted an enhancement request to add an "exclusion scope" to
>> LightBase
>> > [1]. The "exclusion scope" is a list of nodes which should not be
>> affected
>> > by the light. It's a convenient alternative for adding all of the nodes
>> to
>> > the scope except for the ones which should be excluded.
>> >
>> > I've written a preliminary Webrev and a sample app that demonstrates the
>> > behavior.
>> >
>> > Please evaluate,
>> > Nir
>> >
>> > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222258
>>
>>
>