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.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 8a16842b
Author:    jeremy <jeremy.w...@mac.com>
Committer: Phil Race <p...@openjdk.org>
URL:       
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/8a16842b4e906b2eede0c01914f41010cabc51c2
Stats:     713 lines in 6 files changed: 594 ins; 114 del; 5 mod

8176501: Method Shape.getBounds2D() incorrectly includes Bezier control points 
in bounding box

Reviewed-by: prr

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6227

Reply via email to