On Fri, 28 May 2021 23:30:33 GMT, Michael Strauß <[email protected]> wrote:
>> well, false greens are the worst we can have, IMO :). I think the test
>> should concentrate on the isolated selectedItems behavior which __must__
>> propagate all notifications that it receives (from indices) in terms of
>> items. If it fails to do so, it's a failure of its own implementation and
>> should produce a failing test.
>>
>> Consider two scenarios:
>>
>> A: indices firing 2 separate changes
>>
>> selectedIndices.replaceAll(i -> i == 0 ? 1 : 0);
>> assertEquals(2, changes.size());
>> assertEquals(change(replaced(0, range("foo"), range("bar"))),
>> changes.get(0));
>> assertEquals(change(replaced(1, range("bar"), range("foo"))),
>> changes.get(1));
>>
>> B: indices firing a composed change:
>>
>> selectedIndices._beginChange();
>> selectedIndices.replaceAll(i -> i == 0 ? 1 : 0);
>> selectedIndices._endChange();
>> assertEquals(indicesChanges.size(), changes.size());
>> assertEquals(1, changes.size());
>> assertEquals(change(replaced(0, range("foo", "bar"), range("bar",
>> "foo"))), changes.get(0));
>>
>> B passes both before and after the fix, A fails both before and after the
>> fix. Whether or not that can be helped currently, is a different story. If
>> can't be solved right now, I would suggest to keep it failing, file an issue
>> about it and ignore the test with the issue id.
>
> I disabled the tests until the underlying
> [issue](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8267951) is fixed.
Would suggest to make them correct before ignoring - expected are the exact
analogue of those fired by selectedIndices (which is two in the test setup)
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/478
