This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
| Summary: | Mapping from Java to JavaFX variables needed for Profiler and Debugger | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | javafx | Reporter: | Alexey Butenko <alexeybutenko> |
| Component: | Unsupported | Assignee: | J Bachorik <yardus> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | blocker | CC: | cms |
| Priority: | P2 | ||
| Version: | 6.x | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Issue Type: | TASK | Exception Reporter: | |
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 135676 | ||
|
Description
Alexey Butenko
2008-08-19 10:14:23 UTC
Alexei, I guess we need this also for function names, right? One more question: do we need the direction <Java Name> --> <FX Name>? Do we also need the opposite direction? One more thing: can you suggest where we should put this? JavaFX Source module, some utitility class? Can you suggest the method signatures? Yes, for function names also. Direction is <Java> --> <JavaFX>, opposite direction probably doesn't needed, but may be Michael will correct me. For the rest questions I'll think about usage example, for better understanding how we should use. wrong cc specified Agreed with Alexey, we don't need <FX>-<Java> mapping. I'm not sure how to handle situation (I believe very often) when different functions of one FX code generate more than one instances of the same Java classes (for instance, widgets). Any suggestions how the mapping should be organized in this case? Simple names mapping won't help. Post 1.0 feature. Reassigning to profiler team. Closing all bugs filed against JavaFX 1.x as wontfix. We will support JavaFX 2.0 - please keep opened only bugs against the new release. Thanks. |