Re: RFR: 8087673: [TableView] TableView and TreeTableView menu button overlaps columns when using a constrained resize policy.

[Jose Pereda]

On Mon, 29 Aug 2022 22:29:22 GMT, Andy Goryachev <ango...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The corner region is currently laid out with this assumption:
>> 
>>         // position the top-right rectangle (which sits above the scrollbar)
>> 
>> However, the vertical scrollbar is not always visible. Therefore, when that 
>> is the case, the corner region is laid out on top of the table column 
>> headers, overlapping any of their graphic or text content. In case of the 
>> last visible column header, it is not always possible to scroll horizontally 
>> to see the full content, either because of a constrained resize policy or 
>> because there is no more space left after the last column.
>> 
>> This PR fixes this issue by considering as padding for the last visible 
>> column header the presence of the corner region over it, only when the 
>> vertical scrollbar is not visible and the corner region is.
>> 
>> A couple of tests have been added to both TableViewTest and 
>> TreeTableViewTest.
>> 
>> Test 1: Before and after the changes :
>> 
>> <img width="312" alt="image" 
>> src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2043230/187190928-efc29e38-8de2-4daf-8eff-a218d6fae181.png";>
>> <img width="312" alt="image" 
>> src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2043230/187190991-deaa88b3-2f52-48bc-b3ec-107a5151f7b5.png";>
>> 
>> Test 2:  Before (sort arrow is there, but not visible) and after the changes:
>> <img width="412" alt="image" 
>> src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2043230/187191310-fb348d8c-84fc-4254-a1a5-91811bf09b79.png";>
>> <img width="412" alt="image" 
>> src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2043230/187191358-0d4937cb-b3b4-4530-9489-ff8cbf0c8443.png";>
>
> modules/javafx.controls/src/main/java/javafx/scene/control/skin/TableColumnHeader.java
>  line 381:
> 
>> 379:         }
>> 380: 
>> 381:         double cornerRegionPadding = tableHeaderRow == null ? 0d : 
>> tableHeaderRow.cornerPadding.get();
> 
> minor: could we use consistent 0 or 0.0 or 0d?
> (I'd suggest 0.0 to avoid int->double conversion, or 0d as very few people 
> use 0d)

Indeed it is not consistent at all throughout all the source code...

> or 0d as very few people use 0d

do you mean `or 0 as very few people use 0d` or `or 0d as very few people use 
0`? 

Checking Controls source code, doubles use `0` or `0d` or `0.0d` as well as 
0.0, so it will be hard to be consistent without making too many changes... For 
instance, next line is `double sortWidth = 0;`. If I go to 0.0, should I change 
it as well?

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/886