On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:03 GMT, Jeremy <d...@openjdk.java.net> wrote:
> This removes code that relied on consulting the Bezier control points to > calculate the Rectangle2D bounding box. Instead it's pretty straight-forward > to convert the Bezier control points into the x & y parametric equations. At > their most complex these equations are cubic polynomials, so calculating > their extrema is just a matter of applying the quadratic formula to calculate > their extrema. (Or in path segments that are quadratic/linear/constant: we do > even less work.) > > The bug writeup indicated they wanted Path2D#getBounds2D() to be more > accurate/concise. They didn't explicitly say they wanted CubicCurve2D and > QuadCurve2D to become more accurate too. But a preexisting unit test failed > when Path2D#getBounds2D() was updated and those other classes weren't. At > this point I considered either: > A. Updating CubicCurve2D and QuadCurve2D to use the new more accurate > getBounds2D() or > B. Updating the unit test to forgive the discrepancy. > > I chose A. Which might technically be seen as scope creep, but it feels like > a more holistic/better approach. > > Other shapes in java.awt.geom should not require updating, because they > already identify concise bounds. > > This also includes a new unit test (in Path2D/UnitTest.java) that fails > without the changes in this commit. Jeremy, please enable github actions on your forked repository: see https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Testing ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6227
