Andy, I think this is a good solution because it provides everything needed for
sorting.
Moreover, it complies with the generics of TableColumn.
For example,
var column = new TableColumn<Person, String>("First Name");
SortPolicy<Person, String> sortPolicy = ...
column.setSortPolicy(sortPolicy);
But don't you think the VALUE parameters are redundant since they can be
obtained directly from ITEM?
Best regards, Pavel
On 5/19/25 22:28, Andy Goryachev wrote:
One possible solution would be to deprecate the comparator property (not for
removal, keep it for backward compatibility), and add a new property
'sortPolicy' which will use an interface that can be evolved, as opposed to a
naive callback.
public interface SortPolicy<ITEM,VALUE> {
public int compare(ITEM itemA, VALUE valueA, ITEM itemB, VALUE valueB);
}
when set, the new property will override the comparator property.
What do you think?
-andy
*From: *openjfx-dev <openjfx-dev-r...@openjdk.org> on behalf of PavelTurk
<pavelturk2...@gmail.com>
*Date: *Monday, May 19, 2025 at 00:59
*To: *openjfx-dev@openjdk.org <openjfx-dev@openjdk.org>
*Subject: *Let's discuss JDK-8338952
About six months ago, I opened JDK-8338952 with a proposal to add an item
comparator to (Tree)TableView.
The reason for this issue is that when using non-standard sorting — for example, when
there is a "Total"
row in the table — the standard API becomes insufficient. One has to reinvent
the wheel, and the code
quickly becomes extremely messy. Given that tables are one of the core UI
components, this becomes
a serious problem.
To address this, I proposed adding an item comparator, which I believe would be
very simple to implement.
I suggest we at least discuss this issue so we can start moving toward a
solution.
Best regards, Pavel
