On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:29:29 GMT, altrisi <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This is the first of a number of PRs to remove doPrivileged uses in client
>> libraries.
>> These calls are obsolete dead code after JEP 486.
>>
>> I have run all our automated tests, including JCK tests, and manually tested
>> SwingSet.
>>
>> One thing I might have missed in a couple of cases is that it seems that
>> javac doesn't seem to notice if you leave an un-needed
>> SuppressWarnings("removal") annotation.
>>
>> As per the bug report I am limiting (as much as I can) what I touch here to
>> be just the immediate consequences of removing doPrivileged calls. These
>> changes are plenty enough as it is.
>
> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/swing/plaf/basic/BasicLookAndFeel.java
> line 2186:
>
>> 2184: AWTEventHelper() {
>> 2185: super();
>> 2186: run();
>
> I don't think this method being called `run()` still makes sense when just
> being called from the constructor, it used to make (more) sense when it was
> an override from PrivilegedAction.
I thought about that, but I was limiting the changes.
> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/swing/plaf/metal/MetalLookAndFeel.java
> line 150:
>
>> 148: @SuppressWarnings("removal")
>> 149: String systemFonts = AccessController.doPrivileged(
>> 150: new
>> GetPropertyAction("swing.useSystemFontSettings"));
>
> Missed the GetPropertyAction import for this file (can't annotate there).
another one for a follow-up
> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/swing/text/AbstractDocument.java line
> 150:
>
>> 148: if (defaultI18NProperty == null) {
>> 149: // determine default setting for i18n support
>> 150: String o = System.getProperty(I18NProperty);
>
> I believe the whole handling of `I18NProperty` (this line and the if-else
> below) can be simplified to Boolean.getBoolean, similar to what has been done
> in other places in this PR.
I noticed but I did not want to change the pattern any more than I was forced
to, so I left it.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22090#discussion_r1842783019
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22090#discussion_r1842785690
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22090#discussion_r1842785165
