On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 11:14 PM John Hendrikx <john.hendr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The CSS code, and its API, to put it diplomatically, is IMHO a bit under > cooked. > > I've had quite a few looks at it, and each time I've come to the > conclusion that it is near impossible to do any worthwhile improvements > to it without at a minimum getting rid of the ParsedValue abomination. > This class has generics that are used like 1% of the time, and in all > other cases is either used raw or just instanceof'd and casted to > whatever type the code knows will be in there. It literally pollutes > the code and makes it plain unreadable, not to mention giving you a > completely false sense of security -- it's about as useful as just > passing Objects around (which can be arrays, or even arrays of arrays...). > > So I'm already 100% in favor as this proposal will be getting rid of > ParsedValue. The converter example looks like a breath of fresh air > compared to the current code seen in most converters.
The fact that ParsedValue is almost unusable by third-party applications works to our advantage here, as this is the reason why we can remove it in the first place. > > Introducing a new method here would have to opportunity to give this a > less confusing name (so not all three of these variants are called > "convert"). As far as I can see there are three main functions for a > StyleConverter: > > - Interpret "raw" CSS values to FX types (like Border, Color, String, > double) > - Take a map of FX types (already interpreted values) and consolidate > these into an FX type, which I think is used or can be used for > shorthand properties and is used to merge values into say a Border or > Background > - The reverse of the above function (for CSS transitions that are > applied to properties that consist of multiple distinct values). > - There is no reverse of the interpret function (there is no need to > convert FX types back to CSS, the code that writes CSS files operates at > a lower level). > > Ideally something like: > > - interpret/parse/convertCSS for T convert(ComponentValue, Font) > - consolidate/merge for T convert(Map<CssMetadata,Object>) > - split for Map<CssMetadata, Object> split(T) > > Did you any thoughts on this as well? Not beyond what you wrote down here. I think these are quite different concerns, and don't need to be solved together. > PS. > > Under Solution 1, I think the data structure should read "<function>rgb > (<percentage>100 <percentage>50 <percentage>0 )" (rgb instead of gray) ? Yes, thanks for pointing that out!
