I just added another feature to the resize-to-content mode -> Add an optional padding! This avoids "crowded" feel of columns that are resized to the exact required content width.

Another nugget I just added: You can ask a column to retain it's "default" width and also make that width fixed. Extremely handy 🙂

This screencast only shows a subset of the features:

looks nice that screencast and you switched to presentationmode in intellij 😉

I see you dropped the column(“name”) resizeTo syntax

Yeah, that wasn't pleasant 🙂 Now that all columns have nice builders this could also be written as:

@User uploaded a file: Untitled

I am close to being done with the current customer I would love a next customer with at least java 7 and some kotlin 😉

and maybe even javafx

That's the dream 🙂

I'll be gone for a while, back tonight.

have fun

and I like the builders

@edvin I was watching the column screencast again and is it possible to do something like

column("bed").weightedWidth(1.0).minWidth(contentWidth())

@ron Not presently, but that would be possible to do indeed.

Good I can see that use case

@ron

weigthedWidth

now takes two optional parameters:

padding: Double

and

minContentWidth: Boolean

You are too fast

@Ruckus @thomasnield I ran into problems with the new type-less

column

builder. If you don't know the type of the cell, you can't assign a meaningful cellFactory without doing a cast. There might also be other issues we don't know about yet. For this reason I think it would be unwise create a column builder of any kind where the cell type or the item type is lost. The best we can do is probably:

column("Name", String::class)

. Then the

value { it.value.name}

syntax is still valid, and it is possible to call

cellFactory { CheckboxCell() }

for a boolean column etc.

This syntax avoids the need to specify the TableView type as well, and it gives us an opportunity to introduce the new builder without clashing with the old ones.

For the SmartResize feature I'm starting to believe that "fit to content" is a better default. It will probably mean less configuration and more "works-out-of-the-box" 🙂

I think the most use cases will be "fit to content" and remainingWidth to be honest

Yeah, so the default now will be that columns get what they need and any leftovers are given to the rightmost resizeable column. I think that will take care of a lot of use cases.

Sorry guys, I've been out of town all weekend. Let me catch up on what I've missed.

@Ruckus Sweet, no rush 🙂

@edvin When you say the

column("Name", String::class)

builder would not clash with the old ones, would we still need a 2.0.0 release for the other changes to the column builders?

@Ruckus No 🙂

@Ruckus This will not interfere with the old builders

The only other change is that I've added a third, optional

op

parameter so you don't need

apply

anymore.