Ad NashornScriptEngine (Re: FXMLLoader: not supplying filename to script engine, not supplying event object as argument to script

Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushforth at
Thu Nov 14 21:57:48 UTC 2019

On 11/14/2019 10:12 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
> On 14.11.2019 16:34, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>> On 13.11.2019 19:50, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2019 9:42 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
> ... cut ...
>>>> To reproduce the testcase one would need ooRexx and the Java bridge BSF4ooRexx (all opensource) for
>>>> which I could come up with a zip-archive (assuming binaries within should be 64-bit) and a script to
>>>> set up the environment either for Windows, Linux or MacOS, whatever you advise. Would that be o.k.?
>>> We prefer not to rely on third-party libraries for test cases. In any case we would not be able to
>>> use that for a regression test / unit test.
> If test units really seem to be important in this particular case, one possibility would be to
> create a minimalistic ScriptEngine implementation in pure Java just for the sole purpose to allow
> the creation of a test unit that is able to assert that FXMLLoader puts the ScriptEngine.ARGV and
> ScriptEngine.FILENAME entries into the ENGINE_SCOPE Bindings. E.g. having the ScriptEngine's eval()
> methods return the ScriptContext at invocation time in order to allow inspection of the Bindings.
> This way it would become also possible to write in addition test units that also check whether all
> FXML elements that carry a fx:id are really placed into the GLOBAL_SCOPE Bindings.

Something like that seems reasonable, and would avoid a dependence on 
Nashorn, which in addition to having all the problems you mentioned, is 
deprecated for removal.

> However,

Did you have something more to add?

-- Kevin

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list