On Mon, 16 Sep 2024 21:38:36 GMT, Harshitha Onkar <hon...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> `positionTestUI()` option is added to PassFailJFrame (PFJ).
>> 
>> With this change multiple UI can be positioned using the PFJ new builder 
>> pattern by providing implementation for the Functional Interface 
>> `PositionWindows.positionTestWindows(List<? extends Window> 
>> testWindows,InstructionUI instructionUI)` in the test code. 
>> 
>> Since the position implementation is done in test code it allows flexibility 
>> as the user can add custom positioning code as per test UI requirements.
>> 
>> Usage:
>> 
>> PassFailJFrame.builder()
>>                       .title("Test Instructions")
>>                       .instructions(INSTRUCTIONS)
>>                       .rows(int)
>>                       .columns(int)
>>                       .testUI(<TestClass::createAndShowUI>)
>>                       .positionTestUI(<TestClass::positionMultiTestUI>)
>>                       .build()
>>                       .awaitAndCheck();
>> 
>> where positionMultiTestUI is the implementation for positioning of multiple 
>> test windows for `PositionWindows.positionTestWindows(List<? extends Window> 
>> testWindows,InstructionUI instructionUI)`
>> 
>> @aivanov-jdk has demonstrated custom test UI positioning in this PR: 
>> **[8294156: Demo positioning of multiple test 
>> windows](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15721)**
>
> Harshitha Onkar has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   removed errorenous check

I think that this can be improved by adding some predefined positionTestUI 
functions, like in the #15721 (we can borrow them from it).
For example, consider adding `PositionWindowsLib.java`(or maybe a nested public 
static class for `PassFailJFrame` to avoid extra `@build` clause), which has 
functions something like 

.positionTestUI(PositionWindowsLib::positionHH) // aka 
TwoWindowsHH.positionTestUI
.positionTestUI(PositionWindowsLib::positionHV) // aka 
TwoWindowsHV.positionTestUI
...


It'll be easier for a test developer to just take a ready-to-use function 
(which in most cases will be the same across multiple tests),
and it'll be easier for the test reviewer because there will be less code to 
review.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21023#pullrequestreview-2308800489

Reply via email to