Here are the two functions in action. The first view uses replaceWith and the second uses replace. Is replaceWith or replaceBy best btw?

-.kt

I don't think

replaceWith()

sounds that confusing, thought it is a little unclear what is being replaced in the example above. Something like

replaceView()

might be a little clearer.

I agree.

on one hand I don't like the idea that view is responsible for replacing itself

on the other I don't know where else to put it 😕

replace

and

replaceWith

are opposites of eachother, and the function is present on

UIComponent

. We could rename them to

replaceView(replacee)

and

replaceWithView(replacement)

?

Welcome @shamrock_frost 🙂

I'm going to create a screencast that showcases the View replacement so we need to decide on those function names 🙂

Now that we have an animation DSL - I wonder if we would be able to add an optional slide-in or slide-out animation to go with the replaceView function.. Does anyone have any experience with animating something into/out of view?

I found a way to provide transition animations to the replacement, so I'll add some default SlideIn/SlideOut transitions, and users can easily create their own as well 🙂

I think that would be really cool to have optional arguments for transitions. Instead of doing just stock PowerPoint-like ones, I wonder how hard it would be to create Mac OS X-like animations. Always liked the effect of a window getting sucked down into the task bar.

I don't have much experience with animations in general, but I'm sure we can figure out how to create some cool effects. The most important thing is to make it pluggable so it's possible to create your own transition effects. I'm working on integrating this with the existing

FX.replaceComponent()

function to avoid code duplication and also call

onDock/onUndock

when the switch happens.

Sounds good.

Btw guys, regarding animation I decided RxKotlinFX and RxJavaFX don't really need to do much to support it. TornadoFX looks to be the appropriate place to streamline animations, and I submitted those builders yesterday. However, I did create a new JavaFX equivalent to

Observable.interval()

and submitted it to RxJavaFX. I also am discovering some VERY cool reactive animation patterns you can do. https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJavaFX/issues/34#issuecomment-228610893

Nice Thomas 🙂 Will look at it more closely later. As for shape builders, it's hard to determine what parameters the builders should take. Look at

Rectangle

for example. It has different constructors for

width, height

,

x, y, width, height

,

width, height, fill: Paint

. I'm not sure what parameters the builder should take.. Up until now we have avoided function overloading for the builders, and I think we should try to keep it that way.

So maybe just define all those in the block then? Maybe the super common parameters, like the lengths for the four sides, can be done in the builder parameters.

I'd say define them all, but default them to the same default JavaFX uses when they aren't supplied.

Something like

rectangle(x: Double = 0.0, y: Double = 0.0, width: Double = 0.0, height: Double = 0.0, fill: Paint? = null, op: (Rectangle.() -> Unit)? = null): Rectangle

(I would actually probably leave

fill

out of the list and just have it set in

op

though)

Maybe just have any location/size related values as params?

Yeah, that sounds like a good idea, define all but fill.. And maybe use the order "x, y, width, height, rest of parameters" as a template for all the shape builders?

Sure, though not all shapes use width and height. For example, the

CubicCurve

has a start, end, and two handles. The JavaFX constructor orders them with start, control 1, control 2, and end. Would we want to follow that pattern or do something like start, end, control 1, control 2?

(Control 1 changes the direction the curve leaves start, and control 2 changes the direction the curve leaves end)

I ended up adding them in the order they are used in their respective constructors. I think that makes the most sense. I also added builder for all PathElements (used primarily for Path).

@Ruckus: It looks like to have a lot of experience with Shapes.. do you mind taking a look at the stuff I added?

A little, but not much honestly. I had to use a few for a project I was working on a while back (mainly `Circle`s and `CubicCurves`s). But I'll take a look and see if anything stands out.

Great, thank you :))

Also, do you think it would be worth building some sort of convenience for binding values, or just stick with the built in ones? For example, when you have a

Curve

of some sort and want to bind the ends to two nodes that move around (forming a connection line of sorts).