fsController is a controller that is injected into the View.

So think of it as an event handler, not containing business logic.

For demo apps/very small apps I sometimes put business logic in there though.

My first version of keepassjava used guice as a lot but I have refractored a lot to controllers

For running it in parts, are there any problems with the dependency graph? The view creates a controller object that needs some other object, right?

The view asks for a controller tornadofx instantiates it

It's a di like solution

so if the dependency needed initialization, you'd have to provide a mock to run the View or Fragment in place?

I do the initialization during startup of the app. As the controller does not have nullable code it runs without the init

It does shows nothing

@carlw Yes, what you can basically do is

find(TheView::class)

first and do any manual initialization needed for the test.

But I try to write everything so it's reactive and doesn't need data to start. That seldom gives me trouble.

Yeah what he said👍

@edvin thumbs up from me too, but i have a few legacy apps that need initialization

@carlw It's often possible to work around it elegantly, or you would need some init code once in a while 🙂

@edvin agreed. i was wondering if kotlin or tornado's DI could proxy init the controller in the view in case there was some initialization needed on a dependency

I haven't seen the need because of the trick mentioned above, but we can for sure add that if needed 🙂

probably not needed. just trying to picture reworking the init sequences of some spring and guice apps (not a tornadofx problem)

i'll install the plugin before i start on the typesafe builders so that I can work on ItemFragment and MainView without adding trival mains

it's definitely a good goal to bring up the plainest UI possible as quickly as possible and then start any init sequences

This would be worth covering in the guide

different topic...tornadofx could use a flagship product like this http://asciidocfx.com/

sort of like the way GIMP promotes GTK

@gtnarg Good point! Thomas, do we have anything about this? I think it might be a common misconception that only FXML views can be previewed.

@carlw Very interesting indeed.. hm.. .Something valuable, actually needed that could help us gain some traction and be helpful at the same time...

@edvin i don't think it's a misconception unless I don't understand the DI. If you run the View() and don't have a dependency, you can't run the builder but you will be able to view the FXML

@edvin Maybe the plugin can have some facility for a mock? In Guice terms a set of test dependencies would be injected that would provide empty lists, etc

@edvin this is for a legacy consideration. new apps should follow the guidance Grant is describing

@edvin or if there really is the need for an upfront initialization of a component

@carlw I'm not sure I understand "If you run the View() and don't have a dependency, you can't run the builder"