Uploaded image for project: 'JDK'
  1. JDK
  2. JDK-8091600

Shapes and object-oriented programming - comparison with Java2D



      I am trying to map a rigorous geometry library (JTS) to JavaFX and finding some inconsistencies.
      My understanding of Java2D is that the Shape interface provides a standard means of interfacing with the geometry by means of the PathIterator.
      Contrast with JavaFX where Shape does not seem to have any reference to the geometry, hence all sub-classes define and access the geometry differently. This seems to be unhelpful and not in the spirit of object-oriented programming. Is this something that could be fixed in future?

      Alternatively is there a simple mechanism for translating Java2D geometries into JavaFX scenegraph? (Since the geometry model in Java2D seems to be quite well designed; why was all this good work ignored?)

      Also could the Path, PathElement, concept be extended to include the equivalent of a FlatteningPathIterator?

      My final comment would be, when designing a 2D geometry based system would it not be better to start with 'proper' geometry model like JTS so that there are no fundamental inconsistencies?

      (from Wikipedia - The JTS Topology Suite (JTS) is an open source Java software library that provides an object model for Euclidean planar linear geometry together with a set of fundamental geometric functions. JTS is primarily intended to be used as a core component of vector-based geomatics software such as geographical information systems. It can also be used as a general-purpose library providing algorithms in computational geometry. JTS implements the geometry model and API defined in the OpenGIS Consortium Simple Features Specification for SQL.)


          Issue Links



              • Assignee:
                jkayjfx Jim Kay (Inactive)
              • Votes:
                2 Vote for this issue
                2 Start watching this issue


                • Created: