On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 06:59:08 GMT, Ajit Ghaisas <aghai...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Issue : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193286 > > Root Cause : > Incorrect implementation. > Current implementation of int wrapValue(int,int,int) in Spinner.java works > well if min is 0. > Hence this implementation works with ListSpinnerValueFactory, but fails with > IntegerSpinnerValueFactory. > > Fix : > Added a method for IntegerSpinnerValueFactory with separate implementation. > > Testing : > Added unit tests to test increment/decrement in multiple steps and with > different amountToStepBy values. > > Also, identified a related behavioral issue > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242553, which will be addressed > separately. I'm not sure this is quite right, but I need to look at it more closely. It should fix the bug in question for well-behaved values, but might make it possible to return a value outside the range of [min, max]. I also want to think about it in light of [JDK-8242553](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242553). While a partial fix seems OK, we need to avoid the situation where some values cause a change from one buggy behavior to a different buggy behavior on the way to fixing it right. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/174
