Proposal: Deprecate Builders

Werner Lehmann lehmann at
Thu Apr 4 04:07:19 PDT 2013

Hi Tom,

On 04.04.2013 12:52, Tom Schindl wrote:
> What I wanted to highlight is that while FXML could deal with the
> fx-classes, it can't know what class I defined and it needs a way to
> create instances of them, until today I could provide my custom builder
> to it.

I think the Builder interface does not go away - iirc Richard has 
commented that way on this list. If your builder is not generic and 
extends another generic builder (or something like that), you should be 

> public MyClass {
>    public MyClass(@FXMLValue("x") int x, @FXMLValue("y") int y) {
>    }
> }

Looks very similar to

public void saveNotification(
     @WebParam(name = "sessionId") long sessionId,
     @WebParam(name = "notification") String notification)

This is for webservices, javax.jws.WebParam. It does not really add to 
the legibility of the code though...


More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list