JavaFX and the Missing Interfaces (original) (raw)

Daniel Zwolenski zonski at gmail.com
Mon Nov 5 12:20:59 PST 2012

+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

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list