I modified the testcase according to Anthony Petrov's suggestion( http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2012-March/002389.html) . The new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~zhouyx/7155298/webrev.02/
However, the timeout action in jtreg only checks the main method, but the timeout is caused by timer thread . So, I started an other process to run the testcase and the main testcase waitFor that process to stop. In order to kill the process started by the testcase, I added a ShutdownHook to the runtime of main testcase. And added /othervm action to testcase . It seems the testcase is a little over complex, is there any other method to make the testcase simpler ? On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:04 AM, Oleg Sukhodolsky <son....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Anton V. Tarasov > <anton.tara...@oracle.com> wrote: > > On 3/22/12 6:15 PM, Oleg Sukhodolsky wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Anton V. Tarasov > >> <anton.tara...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> On 22.03.2012 14:37, Oleg Sukhodolsky wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Anton V. Tarasov > >>>> <anton.tara...@oracle.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On 22.03.2012 12:47, Oleg Sukhodolsky wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Sean Chou< > zho...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Oleg, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Seem there are misunderstanding . > >>>>>>> DefaultCaret can receive FocusLostEvent when another control > get > >>>>>>> focused. But it > >>>>>>> doesn't receive FocusLostEvent when disposing. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The reason is XTextAreaPeer doesn't receive FocusLostEvent when > >>>>>>> disposing. But > >>>>>>> I don't know if it is a rule that a FocusLostEvent must be sent to > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> focused>>> component when the top-level window is disposed ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Well, for regular AWT component it is expected. And I'd expect that > >>>>>> this should also be true for peer. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> That's right, focus_lost should be dispatched to a disposed focus > >>>>> owner. > >>>> > >>>> So, now we need to figure out why the caret doesn't get the event. > >>>> > >>>> Oleg. > >>> > >>> > >>> I ran the testcase provided in the webrev and debugged a little. > >>> FOCUS_LOST > >>> does come to the textarea on its disposal, though when the focus event > is > >>> being dispatched I see the peer is null. > >>> This is quite expected actually. When Component.removeNotify() is > called > >>> on > >>> EDT, it transfers focus further (appropriate focus events get queued) > and > >>> then nullifies the peer. The events come later. > >>> Hope this helps. > >> > >> Thank you (I do not have Linux, so I can not debug this). > >> So, now we know that the cause of the problem is that our internal > >> AWTText(Field|Area) may be disposed while they think > >> that they are focused, and, at the same time, we can not propogate > >> real focus lost to them since peer is desposed > >> before we receive the event. > >> So, the suggested fix works fine for one particular problem (unstopped > >> timer), but we may get some other > >> problems due to the cause. > >> For me it looks like better fix would be to pass synthetic focus lost > >> when we dispose text peer, this way we guarantee > >> that life-circle of our synthetic components will be similar to real > >> ones and we will meet Swing's expectations. > >> > >> Does this sounds reasonable? > >> > >> Regards, Oleg. > > > > > > This sounds reasonable, though I personally don't like the idea of yet > > another synthetic focus event... > > well, (synthetic) focus events are your area of expertise ;) > > > I actually like the fix Sean suggested (after we see the whole picture). > > Otherwise, we may follow your suggestion > > to create AWTTextArea.removeNotify(). And even simpler, why not to put > > getCaret().setVisible(false) right into JTextComponent.removeNotify()? > > well, the later is a question for Swing team. > The former is reasonable fix (not the best one, but good enough). > So, if everyone agree with this approach then I'm fine (hope this is > the only problem we > will have with invisible focused JTextXXX) > > Oleg. > > > > > Either of these looks fine to me. > > > > Thanks, > > Anton. > > > > > -- Best Regards, Sean Chou
