On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 12:05:22 GMT, Alexey Ivanov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Support of multiple test UI windows in `PassFailJFrame` is still evolving. > After [JDK-8340210](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8340210), the > `Builder` has a method `positionTestUI` to supply an implementation of the > `PositionWindows` interface which handles the positioning of all test UI > windows created. > > If `PositionWindows` is not provided, all the test UI windows are left with > the default coordinates: (0, 0). > > If `PassFailJFrame` called `positionTestWindow` for the first window, it > would allow the test developer to position other windows based on the > position of the first one. > > This issue was raised in #21029 in [this thread of > comments](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/21029#discussion_r1763744407). > > To make it easier to position multiple test UI windows without implementing > the `PositionWindows` interface, the `PassFailJFrame` should position the > first window of the list. > > The `LotsOfMenuItemsTest.java` test in #21029 had to hard-code the > coordinates or use `PassFailJFrame.positionTestWindow` explicitly in its > `ComponentListener.componentShown`. > > With the proposed change in this pull request, the implementation would use > `ComponentListener.componentMoved`: > > > @Override > public void componentMoved(ComponentEvent e) { > testFrame.setLocation(firstFrame.getX(), > firstFrame.getY() + firstFrame.getHeight() + 8); > } > > > This has the advantage in that the test UI windows don't flicker for a short > time in the upper left corner of the screen; and the developer has to handle > only positioning the second window (frame). > > However, this has a funny effect: if you move the first frame with mouse or > in any other way, the second frame follows. To avoid such kind of behaviour, > call `removeComponentListener` in the handler. > > @honkar-jdk, @azvegint, could you take a look? "With the proposed change in this pull request, the implementation would use ComponentListener.componentMoved:" you mean the implementation of the test ? Perhaps adding the required pattern in the examples would be a good idea. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21057#issuecomment-2359268838
