On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 03:34:55 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan <[email protected]> 
wrote:

>> [JDK-8348760](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8348760) fixed an issue in 
>> Windows L&F JMenuItem layout whereby radio bullet/checkmark was rendered in 
>> different columnspace than menuitem imageicon so radiobullet/checkmark is 
>> rendered in first column and imageicon is rendered in 2nd column but this 
>> rendering of imageicon in 2nd columnspace was done invariably for all 
>> JMenuItem irrespective of if it is JRadioButtonMenuItem or JCheckBoxMenuItem 
>> or JMenuItem, which is wrong.
>> 
>> Normal JMenuItem (which are not JRadioButtonMenuItem or JCheckBoxMenuItem) 
>> imageicon rendering should be done in first columnspace as was done before 
>> JDK-8348760 fix because there is no radiobullet/checkmark to render for 
>> those menuitems so no need to reserve columnspace for those bullet/checkmark 
>> icon
>> 
>> Before fix
>> 
>> <img width="205" height="127" alt="image" 
>> src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/13a1e352-5e8d-4251-b7a7-032935eab74e";
>>  />
>> 
>> 
>> After fix
>> 
>> <img width="195" height="131" alt="image" 
>> src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/84ec3ee6-2823-4bf7-840d-b53f2e9d44c3";
>>  />
>
> Prasanta Sadhukhan has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fix

Reverted the text alignment to have vertical alignment as before, but kept the 
JMenuItem imageicon alignment as it seems to be at par with native app for 
normal non-radio/non-check JMenuItem (as mentioned here 
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/29730#issuecomment-3919123593) and this JBS 
is about that only..

<img width="415" height="387" alt="image" 
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4b5f11d8-cade-4f07-8cb3-cc188a994a73";
 />


> They do need to be aligned. Anything else is weird.

It was aligned before this PR and so I closed this JBS as Not an Issue but it 
was reopened..

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/29730#issuecomment-3942093367

Reply via email to