On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 07:34:29 GMT, Ambarish Rapte <[email protected]> wrote:
>> modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/com/sun/prism/es2/X11GLFactory.java
>> line 171:
>>
>>> 169: deviceDetails.put("XVisualID",
>>> Long.valueOf(nGetVisualID(nativeCtxInfo)));
>>> 170: deviceDetails.put("XDisplay",
>>> Long.valueOf(nGetDisplay(nativeCtxInfo)));
>>> 171: deviceDetails.put("XScreenID",
>>> Integer.valueOf(nGetDefaultScreen(nativeCtxInfo)));
>>
>> Autobox?
>
> I think the statements look more readable the way they are.
> The type of LHS of the expression is Object, so a reader will have to find
> return type of those methods to understand what type of Object gets created.
> I think such calls which use a return value from a method should use explicit
> calls.
> But then on other side in case if return type of the method is changed, then
> we need to also change these explicit calls.
> Sounds like a decision to make for other time. What do you think ?
The real problem here is not finding out what the return type is, it's that the
`deviceDetails` type is a raw `HashMap` so it's not clear what type should be
put in the map. If it were `HashMap<Object, Object>` then the reader should not
care what gets put into the map since it's an `Object`.
It's fine as is anyway.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/423
