On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:40:06 GMT, John Hendrikx <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I had the same thought here.
>> The signature is indeed weird, but since it is perfectly legal to invoke it 
>> with selectIndices(0, null), I think this change is absolutely correct.
>
> Well it's legal Java code, but that doesn't mean that leaving something 
> `null` is allowed.  At the very least it is undocumented behavior:
> 
>     /**
>      * <p>This method allows for one or more selections to be set at the same 
> time.
>      * It will ignore any value that is not within the valid range (i.e. 
> greater
>      * than or equal to zero, and less than the total number of items in the
>      * underlying data model). Any duplication of indices will be ignored.
>      *
>      * <p>If there is already one or more indices selected in this model, 
> calling
>      * this method will <b>not</b> clear these selections - to do so it is
>      * necessary to first call clearSelection.
>      *
>      * <p>The last valid value given will become the selected index / selected
>      * item.
>      * @param index the first index to select
>      * @param indices zero or more additional indices to select
>      */
>     public abstract void selectIndices(int index, int... indices);

I think it is also pretty clear the original author intended to check 
`rows.length == 0` and made the mistake that it would be called with `rows == 
null` when there are no further indices specified, which is incorrect.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1018

Reply via email to