On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 11:43 +0100, Roman Kennke wrote: > Hi Lillian, > > Am Dienstag, den 22.11.2005, 15:15 -0500 schrieb Lillian Angel: > > Added implementations for missing functions in MetalIconFactory and > > MetalTextFieldUI. > > > > 2005-11-22 Lillian Angel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > * javax/swing/plaf/metal/MetalIconFactory.java > > (getMenuArrowIcon): Implemented. > > (getMenuItemArrowIcon): Implemented to call getMenuArrowIcon, > > because both icons look the same. > > Would be useful to figure out if this really should return the same icon > class. They may look the same in some scenarious, but differ in > others...
Roman and I agreed to leave this. The arrow icons look identical in all scenarios. If anyone sees differently, please let me know. > > > (getMenuItemCheckIcon): Implemented. > > * javax/swing/plaf/metal/MetalTextFieldUI.java > > (propertyChange): Implemented to call super only, because it > > is a hook method. It doesn't have a different purpose from > > BasicLookAndFeel, other than allowing a subclass to override it. > > I disagree. If the hook is provided in the BasicLookAndFeel and it's > specified to be overridden in MetalTextFieldUI, then there must be some > functionality there. Only calling super.propertyChange() doesn't change > anything (except some additional useless calls) from not implementing > this class at all in MetalTextFieldUI. I would guess that there actually > _should_ be some functionality in this method. Would be good to figure > out. Neither Roman or I could see what else should be done here. I am leaving it as is for now. Lillian _______________________________________________ Classpath-patches mailing list Classpath-patches@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
